Skip to Content

Chuck 70 vs All Star

Chuck 70 vs All Star

The Converse Chuck Taylor is one of the most influential sneakers of all time. Since 1970, these high-top sneakers have been running from hoop to hoop on numerous basketball courts and later evolved along the way into the staple footwear in everyone’s closet.

However, as the classic sneaker developed, Converse eventually took a look back, where they introduced Chuck 70 in 2013.

The All Star Chuck 70 is a redesigned sneaker that employs modern details. It’s more of a rival to the classical Chuck Taylor sneaker from the late 1960s and 1970s. The shoes come with a slightly higher rubber foxing, cushioned footbed, and a substantial rubber toe cap to provide long-lasting comfort.

These shoes come with a chunkier look, with a taller sidewall and sculpted silhouette. They also vintage looks with yellowish-tinted rubber, reminiscent of a classical vintage sneaker.

The Chuck 70s are packed with more cushioning than the Classics, so in case you want more support, these might be a better choice for you. Besides, the higher rubber sidewall isn’t just for looks. It gives more stability to the shoe.

The handsome looks are paired with upgraded components to help solidify the Chuck 70s as a mainstay shoe for the brand. In fact, Convers has had collaborative iterations with a bevy of popular designers and celebs, including Dover Street market, JW Anderson, Carhartt WIP, and Brain Dead.

Apart from aesthetics, what else is different? Is the $30 price range worth it? Or what’s the best version anyway?

Chuck 70 Vs All Star: What’s The Difference?

So what’s new? The exterior of the sneaker, which comes in black, blue, or red, hasn’t changed much. The Canvas in the upper as featured by the Chuck 70 is described in press fabric as “premium,” though, in terms of touch, it’s indistinguishable from the standard-issue canvas.

There are also the monochrome matte eyelets that give the shoes a slightly cluttered look. The white rubber sidewall, or rather the foxing where the canvas upper meets the outsole, is slightly thicker on the Chuck 70. The All Star logo patch featured on the inside of the heel (high top) is embroidered instead of printed.

That said, the most notable difference with the Chuck Taylor Star stems from the hood, with additional cushioning, lime-green sock liner crafted from a proprietary Nike foam called Lunarlon.

There are several other interior tweaks, too, such as perforated micro-suede lining to enhance breathability and foam padding on the collar and tongue for maximum comfort.

Note that it’s that foot-shaped slab of foam, which the manufacturer says was added to improve cushioning and arch support, that’s the biggest differentiator.

Also, in the course of our review and research, comparing Chuck 70 against All Star II (same color and the original version of the low-top) side by side, we found that the biggest surprise was how little difference both models seemed to be in fit and feel.

The footbed of the All Star II is slightly less flexible- though that’s something we can tolerate considering the thickness of the sock liner inserts. Each step of the new Chuck 70 is designed to feel a little more cushioned than the original. Nonetheless, the first impression isn’t really the one that justifies the $20 premium.

The shoes are a tad more comfortable, and you’ll realize this after wearing the shoes for one day. In the end, your feet will feel as good as they were when you slipped the shoes in the morning. With the originals, meanwhile, you may experience some sort of aches in the arch support and toe joints- especially if you’re someone who’s severely flat-footed or overweight.

A good number of users stated that their feet were shod in the new Chuck 70. The experience is so comparable to that of wearing a pair of arch-supporting foot-cushioning running shoes. You will realize the improvement after spending a day in a pair of original All Stars.

Sometimes back, Chuck Taylor, All Star shoes rose above being just a piece of athletic footgear to become a fashion statement. The shoes are currently worn at weddings and even on stage during concerts by famous models including Ramones, Kurt Cobain, Cate Blanchett, and Michelle Obama.

The Chuck Taylor sneakers were first acceptable to wear beyond just aesthetic endeavors- though that’s easy to overlook considering the rise of sneaker culture in the early 80s. Besides, the surfeit of stylish shoes has recently crept in with the athletic trend.

With the re-crafted Chuck Taylor All Star II, Converse is basically offering a version of its favorite all-purpose sneaker that looks just slightly different on the exterior. The Chuck 70 feels a whole lot different on the inside, which probably contributes to the target demographic. But is this redesigned model of the original All Star that’s suitable for everyone?

Well, for Cuck lovers who may find themselves a little bit older or weigh a tad heavier than they were back during the purchase of their All Stars, or those planning to spend a ton of time on their feet, the Chuck 70 is very well worth checking out.

Other Notable Differences


Material: The All Star upper features a smooth hand and feels as light as the New Yorker tote bag. The Chuck 70s, on the other hand, has the fabric as the most noticeable thing even before you put the shoes on. Weighing 12-ounces, the cotton canvas is beefier and a little more substantial. You will also get an extra layer of canvas sewn into the uppers at both sides of the vamp.


The insoles refer to the padding included in a pair of Chuck Taylors. Well, the padding level featured by the original All Stars is just enough to get you through the day easily. But you can’t really count on these as an orthopedic oasis.

With the Chuck 70s, the insoles feel more supportive and spongier compared to the Classic Chunk. This is particularly the case at the balls of the foot.


While both soles look pretty much similar, it feels as if the Chunk 70s are slightly grippier, though they have less-defined grooves than the classic All Stars. The sole material is flexible but not flimsy on the All Stars. The same aspect becomes clear, even clearer with the Chuck 70s.


Under this aspect (with the All Stars), the aglets at the laces and the ventilation system are silver-toned and matte. That said, they look identical to the alternative. For the Chuck 70s, the metal eyelets are designed to match the rubber. That means the eyelets are also part of the style because they are shiny, as opposed to the matte finish of the original All Stars.


The laces on the Classic All Star are truly white, and they match the matte white rubber on the outsole and toe cap. For the Chuck 70, it’s no surprise that the laces feel like an upgrade. The overall lacing system is thicker and denser.


Another major appeal for the Chuck 70 is the silhouette. The last for this great contender gives the sneaker a nice shape and definition.

So which one is better: Chuck 70 or Original All Star?

To sum up, you might want to consider the Chuck 70s remake if you’re willing to spend a little extra for the improved experience. While the Classic Chuck uppers feel like a tote bag given for free, the Chuck 70 redesigned uppers feel more like a tote bag worth paying for.

That may sound like a highlight, and it’s certainly is. In fact, it is one of the reasons for the higher price. The 70s are packed with more cushioning compared to the Classics, meaning if you want more support, the shoes will still be an ideal option for you. Besides, they have a higher rubber sidewall that adds more stability and elegance to the shoe.

That said, you might want to with the Classic All Star if you find its shape more appealing than the Chuck 70 and save $30. The uppers of the Classic All Stars feature a smoother texture compared to its retro, and they are more flexible, for starters.

The Classics are also notably lighter, but on the flip side, the heel counter is relatively stiff than the Chuck 70s. This, in turn, helps to keep the shoes in proper shape over time. The shiny varnish on the rubber of the Chuck 70s offers a vintage feel, but it isn’t the most attractive for someone who favors a beat-up sneaker.

The matte look of the original All Star eyelets and rubber surpasses that of the 70s. As far as aesthetics are concerned, the Chuck 70s features a vintage appeal with a more noticeable profile, cap toe, and cream-colored rubber foxing.