Totally Sick (New Shoes)

ShredStylez · Post by **ShredStylez** » 23 Jun 2004 09:02

The CT300's r gone but the new CT520 is in.

The instep looks worse but a better toe perhaps.

Check it yo, these things r soo dope http://www.zappos.com/n/p/dp/1723932/c/3.html

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 23 Jun 2004 09:27

I miss the CT300's. :\ Glad I have a pair on order... I don't like the looks of those as much.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 23 Jun 2004 09:32

Maybe it's just the picture there, but the instep looks horrible.

Opinions?

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 23 Jun 2004 09:41

I think they look fine . . . shouldn't be too big of a change.

bigdirtyfoot · Post by **bigdirtyfoot** » 23 Jun 2004 09:53

The instep doesn't look all that great to me. They look like they would be comfortable and offer good support though.

brian relly · Post by **brian relly** » 23 Jun 2004 10:25

Instep looks the same as the CT300 to me.

MegaFighter_X · Post by **MegaFighter_X** » 23 Jun 2004 11:15

The insteps look the same... It shouldn't be a big change other than in numbers and color.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » 23 Jun 2004 12:50

I´m pretty sure Allan had both of those models with him at FootJam. I got the chance to try them both and I liked the CT300´s better. The toe was pretty good in both of the models, especially for sets, but I don´t think the inside in the CT250 is even enough without any modifications. If I remember correct Allan played mostly in the CT300´s there. Maybe he didn´t have the time to get used to the CT250´s yet or just didn´t like them... Anyway, from the impression I got after kicking in them for a sec, I think the CT250´s work fine for footbag too, at least with some mods on the inside.

BrianW · Post by **BrianW** » 23 Jun 2004 18:48

Felix wrote:CT250 CT250´s CT250´s

were talkin about the CT520's. I think they look alright, but their not my cup of tea. Ill stick with lavers.

Shaun · Post by **Shaun** » 23 Jun 2004 18:49

Felix prob made a typ-o.

B_Man · Post by **B_Man** » 23 Jun 2004 21:44

How are they in terms of weight?

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 23 Jun 2004 23:00

11.9 oz. according to the site.

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 23 Jun 2004 23:23

They're an ounce lighter than the ct300s, which are 12.9 oz.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » 23 Jun 2004 23:36

Shaun wrote:Felix prob made a typ-o.

Yep, sorry.