WHICH ONE TO PICK IF U ONLY HAD 80 DOLLARS

>>11510091
parchment, because I just don't like black n white converse.

parchment you dumb cunt

>>11510108

B-B-But black and white Converses are a classic! They look like Ramones as well

>>11510110
no, ramones look like converse, not the opposite
like if you really had to choose you might as well choose parchment because black and white converses standard even amongst normies

>>11510116
this is correct.

>>11510091
Same dilemma. I'm equally torn but way too indecisive. Truly contemplating both.

>>11510116

Goddamn it. How do they fit?

Parchment you fool.

>>11510135
I've heard IIs are true to size.

>>11510132

OP HERE. I feel ya.

>>11510116

I'm pretty sure normies wear Black and White Classic Chucks not Black and white Chuck II's

>>11510091
Really depends on what style your want them with. If you're wearing those light pastels, the parchment will work better, for example. But both will work, at least color wise, (not texture and silhouette wise) with LOTS of styles. Personally I'd get the white ones. You'll grow to like them.

Things neither of them would work with would be like workwear and techwear and stuff.

File: unicorn.gif (1MB, 379x350px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 379x350px

Somewhat unrelated but what is the consensus on low top vs high top chucks?

>>11510173

I have white chucks already.

File: 1DStrJX.jpg (959KB, 1714x2285px) Image search: [Google]

959KB, 1714x2285px

I am strangely in the same dilemma as well. I really like the black chuck II's with white laces and the patch removed. I also like the white leather all stars.

How do y'all feel about pic related?

>>11510192
If you're actually OP then the parchment ones are less basic imo, and the texture lets then work better with streetwear, or even done form of earth tones

>>11510195

Saw that on /r/streetwear. They look nice without the patch.

>>11510197

Mhmm. Why won't the black and white ones work with streetwear? They look like Ramones with a less interesting sihloutte and not as good texture.

>>11510091
normal converse

converse ii are so unnecessary

>>11510202
Oh no they would, I was just saying the parchment ones would be better than's the plain white ones

How tough is it to remove the patches on the IIs? Are they stitched on better than the originals?

>>11510203

every basic white girl and their grandma has Classic Chuck Taylors, op would probably wil not want them

>>11510209

Yes, they are stitched better than the originals. People use a seam ripper or a xacto knife to remove the Chuck II patches.

>>11510203
not OP, but I've never owned a pair of classics but am willing to try the ii after hearing reports of considerably more comfort

>>11510195
High school / man-child

>>11510216

I tried on Chuck II's in the Converse Outlet (Had only one colorway and that colorway is pretty ugly) , can confirm they are much more comfy than the Classic Chucks.

>>11510219
Should I just find another shoe since I'm 23?

save up for cdg chucks u fucking dolt

>>11510805
But those look like shit

>>11510195
i want ramones really bad but i can't afford them : the shoe.

taking the patch off is alright but lacing like that is just screaming ramones

>>11511387
Agreed. I'm personally not a fan of any lace that loops around the ankles, period. But at the very least, he's dodging that clown aesthetic.

>>11510805
Aren't those sold out usually?

>>11511691
>clown aesthetic
this is what poorfags actually believe while posting the picture of that faggot in aliexpress shoes

Don't discuss converse pleb shoes on a fashion board you underage faggots

>>11511728
If you legitimately think Ramones are not laughably ugly in shape, I'd like to remind you that you're on a board that shoots for appealing aesthetics and not fucking atrocious memes that you strap on your feet. Kindly see yourself the fuck out of here until you can get some decent tastes.

My favorite thing about the Ramones is that they're a prime example of money succumbing to tastes. You can have all the funds in the world to blow on designer shoes, shirts, jeans, whatever. But if you can't identify horrible attire when you see it, it's moot.

I don't know you but you're quickly painting yourself out to be a lost cause who unfortunately and allegedly has money to spend. Have you considered donating some if it to your friends who don't have shit tastes? Assuming you have any? Way better use of everyone's time and energy.

>>11511387
well I would never lace them like that. I would lace them in standard fashion. That was the only picture I could find with the patch removed AND white laces.

>>11510091
size 7..lol
parchment ya pleb. Can't even cop that where I live:(

>>11511841
you're a pleb and talk like a faggot

you've probably been here for less than 3 years and dress like shit, but hey let's listen to some fashion-newbie and his opinion on a certain aesthetic

neckyourself

>>11510091
parchment, idiot

>>11511387
>>11511691
>>11511880

I personally like the aesthetic of wrapping laces around the ankles if the laces are long enough, which with every pair of shoes i've owned I haven't had laces long enough to do so

>>11512077
Please fuck off and waddle out of here in your clown shoes. You should aspire to one day establish your own taste and not jump onto brandwagons. Considering your autistic demeanor I'm not sure if it'll happen, but sometimes you need to shoot for the stars.

>>11510155
normies wear both you stupid cunt

you really think /fa/ is ahead of the times

because it isn't

>>11512077
Mate, you sound very mad and you're attacking him/her rather then their argument. Are you familiar with ad hominem?