Customer Reviews Converse Chuck Taylor® All Star® '70 Hi

These converse have a lot more support than the less expensive brand. The canvas part is still the regular canvas, though sturdy, but the sole is more significant. Daughter loves them and says are comfortable, but have to say, feet build up odor in there!

Great shoe. I cannot recommend the 70s Chuck enough, they're that great. Pay the difference and get these vs the cheaper versions. They are leaps and bounds a higher quality shoe. The canvas is better, soles are thicker, footbed has arch support and the eyelets will not discolor the laces. These are the Chucks we remember from the 70s and 80s.

A classic shoe both in terms of look & feel. The well padded in-sole is significantly better than the regular "Chucks." The toe box is a bit narrow and the laces a tad long, but otherwise an excellent shoe that garners compliments from all. The size (8) was perfect and what I always wear, so I don't know what to make of suggestions to order a half size smaller. Ankle support and lateral stability are good, but certainly not what you'd want to wear in an actual game, especially on an outside asphalt court. They're more for comfort in my opinion. Finally, and as noted in the supplied cleaning instructions, they should not be cleaned with any bleaching agents or come into contact with petroleum products. I bleached a pair of white "Chucks" with the regular wash and it pretty much ruined the shoes - canvas lost its shape. Get 'em!

I usually am a skeptic towards any new imaginings of converse over the years, and decided to try out the 70s throwbacks on a whim and I have to say - I'm impressed. High quality features set this apart from your standard issue Chucks and put it to shame. As a wearer for slightly over a decade and some change, I have to say being beyond pleased with my purchase - it's an investment, this shoe feels like it's going to last much longer and have more character in the process. What really kicks ass about this low profile classic is the cushioned sole, I feel like I'm walking on clouds - although this did cause me to size up from my usual Chuck size 6 to a 7. Easily worth the price tag especially since the regular models keep creeping up over the years. I wish everyone I knew had a pair of these.

Okay, folks. Today is 04/27/16 and I spent months researching the Chuck Taylor All Star 70s Hi-Top (hereafter: CT-70s) via user reviews found on google, yahoo, youtube, Zappos, etc. The reason I spent so much time researching and reading reviews is principally due to the fact that I found so many very conflicting statements from reviewers on what size (length) one should order (i.e. should you buy the same size as regular Chuck Taylors or some other size). It's not like one can simply go down to ones local shoe store and try on the CT-70s, and this is a shame. Instead, the CT-70s must be ordered online from Zappos or Converse. Interestingly, I found that the comments on sizing for the new CT-70s ran the gamut. Some users say the CT-70s are true to fit, others say they run half a size large, others say they run a full size large and still others say, oddly enough, the CT-70s run a bit small. Then there is the whole width issue - which is my estimation is a bit easier to answer as all Chuck Taylors come in only one width and that is which is "Standard" (aka: "D" Width, or regular in the USA). Anyways, my opinion after wearing my Size 10, CT-70s all day today is that they run very similar in size to the ordinary, off-the-shelf Chuck Taylors (hereafter: OTS-CTs) you will find at most local shoe retailers. If anything, the CT-70s might run a shade longer than the OTS-CTs, but I do not think it is even half a size, as I have found that I wear size 10 in the OTS-CTs and my Size 10 CT-70s when put sole to sole for comparison are perhaps 3/8" (a shade over a 1/4 of an inch) longer on the outside dimension. As for walking around fit / comfort - as in have them on your feet for 12 hours today in 80+ degree weather - they fit great and were very comfortable. I would say that IF I did exchange my Size 10, CT-70s for another size it would be for 9-1/2" CT-70s, but no smaller, as I am sure there would be some slight rubbing on the tip of the big toe. As for width, I personally do not see any noticeable difference between the CT-70s and the OTS-CTs. Now for my opinion on the rest of the particulars (quality, etc.) concerning the CT-70s... Are the CT-70s better than the OTS-CTs? Yes, Definitely! The CT-70s uppers (the canvas part) are a slightly heavier / different material and a bit more rigid, but still very comfortable. The footbed and soles are much thicker and made of much higher quality materials. The eyelet grommets are larger and nicer and the shoelaces are of a heavier material and nicer looking (but the laces could perhaps be a slight bit thicker). The only potential down side that I have noticed about the CT-70s is that "wear hotter" on the foot than the OTS-CTs. This result is clearly because of the higher quality materials used, but I see this as a non-issue, as the CT-70s do not make the bottoms of my feet ache like the OTS-CTs typically do. Would I buy the CT-70s again? Yes. In fact, I will not buy the OTS-CTs ever again, so long as Converse is still making the CT-70s. The price difference is of little consequence because these new CT-70s are far more wearable.

I decided to order a women's size 7 because all the reviews said it ran a half size larger. I thought that meant it would feel more like a 7.5, and I wanted the extra room for my toes. I had to send the size 7 back for exchange for the 7.5 size. I hope that won't be too big. I have wider feet, and the toe area is slightly narrow. I think with a slightly thicker sock the 7.5 will fit fine. The quality is pretty good, although I noticed by one of the eyelets there was a flaw in the canvas. I'm hoping that's just a fluke thing. Otherwise I love the look! Long story short, at least for me, these run true to size.

Great pair of shoes. Very comfortable. Got some extra wiggle room for the toes, but I'm not going to return them. Love them. 3rd pair for Zappos in 3 years. Officially part of my regular shoe rack.

I've been wearing Chuck Taylors for nearly 2 decades now; with flat feet, I sometimes have a hard time finding shoes with zero-arch support and Chucks never have arch support (Yay for me). That's true with these 1970s throw backs, though it does have extra squishy cushioning inside, which feels great. The canvas is thicker and sturdier, which also feels great; I have some trouble with the regular All Stars where the tongue kinda just flops to the side, or the high top doesn't stay high. These things look and feel sturdy, easy to manipulate and get things to stay, and I don't think it s really that noticeably bulkier. I m a petite girl, 5 2, they look great and not at all like clown shoes. While the toe cap is smaller and shiny, none of that looks bad and it all works with the shoe. The shininess is not that noticeable in real life, especially in daylight. Even less in bar lighting. Unlike others who said they had to size down compared to regular All Stars, note that I did not have to change my typical Converse size. My size in Converse is a 5.5 (Men s sizing), and I really appreciate that this has been true for my whole life and has never changed. I have wide feet so the extra width these 70s throwbacks give is appreciated, compared to regular All Stars, though it is not terribly wide compared to other shoe brands. My European shoe size is 38, so a 5.5 Men's size for Converse shoes is perfect. Really glad to have found this size on Zappos because the local stores won t go that small, I guess it s primarily male shoppers buying it. In US Women's sizing I would be somewhere between a 7.5 and 8. Very high quality shoe. I love it so far, and I wish all Chucks were made this way. And while I'm wishing I also wish they were still priced like the last pair I bought (before Nike bought the brand). So I'm deducting one star for the high price. But, it;s hard to find a shoe that fits me well and is of-quality, so I'm still a happy customer.

Definitely bulkier than the standard chucks. feel like they're gonna take a while to break in but overall a good alternative if you're bored of the normal ones.

These shoes are by far the comfiest converse I have ever worn. I started noticing frequent lower back pain when wearing the regular converse and looked everywhere for a alternative. I tried Dr. Martens (too chunky and heavy), Vans (nice but just didn't feel like me) and even Adidas Sambas (not bad but too narrow). I ended up buying a pair of the skater version of the Converse All Stars. They were great but came apart after 2 years of wear. I finally came across these on reddit and fell in love. They fit similar to standard all stars but actually have a insole. I can now stand and walk in real Converse all day without any issues. Would highly recommend spending the extra cash on these.

These go with everything, and are extra comfortable. They seem to have thicker soles than the other Converse models.

First off, these look awesome. The stitching is cool. They are a little more substantial than a current pair of Chucks, but I like that. The canvas is sturdy and the seams appear more durable than those on ordinary Chuck Taylors. There is a little extra padding in the insole which is the main reason why I bought these. I had been buying the CTAS Pro Hi shoes because they have an insole. I just can't walk around on a little sliver of rubber all day. I will keep buying these as long as Converse offers them.

I just love these '70 all stars, they are well made and very comfortable right out of the box. You can see and feel the difference in the materials and how it is made compared the the standard hi tops. I have been wearing them for three days at work on concrete, to break them in and they feel great with no fatigue. I bought the '70 Hi to use at the gym since a more sturdy sneaker is better suited. Some of the other reviews had mentioned the laces are too long, they are. Converse should have used the 54" laces from the standard Chucks. But this is not a big deal to change them out with 54" I ordered them from Converse since Zappos doesn't carry laces. The service from Zappos is always great buying shoes online can be trial and error, but Zappos makes it easy.

Converse has begun gluing the arch support insert to the bottom of the shoe. It's not Elmer's glue either. It is impossible to remove the insert. That means that you can't use orthotics with the shoe. What was the problem with the old, removable inserts? Did anyone complain about the inserts moving around in there? Were people worried they'd be stolen at the pool? Try PF Flyers.

Be aware that these shoes are a little larger than your average modern Chuck Taylor. I've been wearing CT's for years and always wore a 9.5. I've had to go down to a 9 in order to get a good fit. They are a little snug but the 9.5 was just too long. Other than that, I do not regret these at all. The canvas is at least twice as thick, the sole is nice and cushioned and the laces are beefy. I love them. I plan on buying another pair of the black version to keep as a back up.

These are seriously so comfortable! They are narrow at first, and they are definitely heavier than the Chuck high tops I'm used to. But there's way more support. I love them! I get lots of compliments when I have them on.

A well-worth it throwback version of my favorite shoe of all time. Heavy canvas that has to be broken in, real rubber sole and a cushy interior. The only thing detracting from a perfect score is those way too long laces. Buy them in your regular Chucks size, which for me is a whole size smaller.

These are sturdier than the usual Chucks. The thicker sole and heavier canvas are great if you are over, say, 170 pounds. These are great sneakers for weightlifting since the thicker canvas gives lots of lateral support. They also work as a day hiker. The only thing I didn't like was the factory laces because they have too much 'give' and make it difficult to get the shoe laced up tight. But replacing them with 54" round athletic laces does the job.

Those that find '70 Hi's to be thicker, heavier, more padded, etc., and have a problem with that... have obviously never played real basketball in Cons,(I have). If they did, they'd know these are the REAL deal. I love mine and I get envious stares from all my friends and foes, that remember when those who wore these were ballers, not the wannabe hipsters (male and female)that have co-opted them in the past 40 years. I have several pair of the current thin, flimsy, 'shells' of what they used to be. I rarely wear them because they lack any support whatsoever. For me these throwbacks are perfect. They take me back to a time when...only REAL ballers wore Cons, and everybody else wished they had enough game to do the same without looking pretentious.

Love the shoes BUT they do run about a half size large. I actually own another pair of converse shoes (size 9) so I purchased a size 8.5 as I had read they ran big. Once they arrived, I actually think and size 8 would have fit best...but I was too excited to wear them and sending them back in would require too much patience on my part! Lots of compliments on them!

Love the shoes but they do run about a half size large. I actually own another pair of Converse shoes (size 9) so I purchased a size 8.5 as I had read they ran big. Once they arrived, I actually think size 8 would have fit best...but I was too excited to wear them and sending them back in would require too much patience on my part! Lots of compliments on them!

I really love these. They have thicker soles than my ordinary low-top Chucks, the toe cap is smaller, and the strings are wider and take up more of the front of the shoes. They are still quite narrow, like all Chucks - but maybe a little more narrow than my low-tops. I have wide feet, so this is not ideal but it was not a deal-breaker for me.