Gravis Chucks LX Elephant
With a $310 sticker price for a shot of Elephant print on a classic Jordan, the market price has recently risen for the signature pattern no matter what shoe it graces. Not surprisingly the print has been adopted by other brands including Gravis. Sticking to familiar colors, Gravis covers the tongue/toe panel of the Chuck LX in a cement colored crackle with black leather and red accents dressing the rest of the shoes.
As a fiend for the crack(le print), I have been pretty open and accepting to this material hitting other shoes whether they sport a Jumpman, swoosh, or neither. What are your thoughts about it? Pics from Sneaker News. |

Gravis Chuck LX Elephant Print
Related Articles |
26 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.

With a $310 sticker price for a shot of Elephant print on a classic Jordan, the market price has recently risen for the signature pattern no matter what shoe it graces. Not surprisingly the print has been adopted by other brands including Gravis. Sticking to familiar colors, Gravis covers the tongue/toe panel of the Chuck LX in a cement colored crackle with black leather and red accents dressing the rest of the shoes.









not a good look at all…
Comment by soloflight22 — July 31, 2008 @ 12:50 pm
soloflight22 do you not like the shoe or the elephant print on a non jordan product?
Frankly, there are few shoes that I don’t like that have elephant print as long as its done right. Mark my words, I would much rather have this pair than any of the Fusions where they color the elephant fugly colors!
Comment by JMoney — July 31, 2008 @ 12:53 pm
this is a lot of money for wanna be Vans if the shoe was like $59.99 that might work I mean there are not gucci, doulche, or prada so that is a lot of money SORRY…
Comment by abelino — July 31, 2008 @ 1:05 pm
abelino, a price for this shoe wasn’t even mentioned in the description above if you read closely enough. The $310 price was directed toward a Jordan sneaker.
“With a $310 sticker price for a shot of Elephant print ON A CLASSIC JORDAN”
Comment by Swood — July 31, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
i think it looks bad on this shoe but elephant print is getting kind of old to me anyways i think they need to come up with somthing new and reserve this for a while
^^^ abelino reread the first sentence it says 310 as in CDP price not the gravis’s
Comment by yung albino — July 31, 2008 @ 1:29 pm
umm… I don’t know what to say or think about these
Comment by swanson — July 31, 2008 @ 1:30 pm
I just don’t like the shoe. But I’m also tired of shoe makers thinking that elephant print and/or lasering equals sales.
Comment by Dj75728 — July 31, 2008 @ 1:32 pm
^ amen. Some companies think we are so easy to make a sale……NOT!
Comment by mic check 212 — July 31, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
Oh My bad the shoe ain’t bad they are nice for the van lover’s
Comment by abelino — July 31, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
JMoney-I agree with you on the elephant print motif…I just don’t like the final product on this particular shoe…
Comment by soloflight22 — July 31, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
not so great. cant eva see maself rockin these, n da $310 price tag is way too much 4 dis
Comment by JC — July 31, 2008 @ 2:06 pm
Hmm… more elephant print, eh?
I guess since everyone else is OD’n with the pattern, I’ll go out and buy a Caprice… get a stupid paint job, such as ELEPHANT PRINT and throw some “23’s” on it for good measure.
Comment by Darneezy — July 31, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
JC, you seem to be in the same boat as abelino…
“Reading is Fundamental.”
Better yet, READING COMPREHENSION!
Comment by Darneezy — July 31, 2008 @ 2:09 pm
im feelin ‘em i like how they look like vans chukkas but with a more modern approach.(the elephant print aint to shabby either)
Comment by ?four! — July 31, 2008 @ 2:15 pm
naw darneezy dont ruin a caprice like that try it on a hundai a weak car like that deserves a bad paint job old school chevy’s for life
Comment by yung albino — July 31, 2008 @ 2:53 pm
reading isn’t cool cuz! get wit da program ya heeerrrrd!
Comment by JMoney — July 31, 2008 @ 3:08 pm
I honestly think there is too much elephant print used on this shoe. I also love the elephant print but if too much is used it doesn’t look right. Had they just used the print on the piece of leather near the heel that would have sold it for me.
Comment by D — July 31, 2008 @ 3:13 pm
idc bout cement print on other sneakers besides nikes and jordans but these r ugly
Comment by greenmaker24 — July 31, 2008 @ 5:06 pm
“Ele-print” has been overused by everyone. Please stop.
http://www.kixpo.com
Comment by NUCLEUS.ONE — July 31, 2008 @ 5:53 pm
i love elephant print too, i love it! but these shoes are kinda weak like most of yall said.
Comment by pup — July 31, 2008 @ 6:28 pm
yuck
Comment by rising_tied — July 31, 2008 @ 8:22 pm
I agree the print is getting old but for some reason I like this shoe. Would buy if I had the chance.
Comment by spencerc — July 31, 2008 @ 10:30 pm
FOR GOD’S SAKE, THESE AREN’T $310!!!! They’re only $120 over here, available at a few spots. Not bad in person…I debated on getting them and passed on em in the end….
Comment by TokyoMike — July 31, 2008 @ 11:13 pm
Yeah TokyoMike, no one ever said they were. Even $120 is too much for these, in my opinion. The shoe itself is mediocre at best and like someone else said, I’m sick of elephant print on everything. Yeah, it can be done right, but it is too often just used to sell an otherwise ugly shoe. This company basically put a black cement 3 colorway on their shoe to sell it. If you’re gonna use elephant print, at least try to make it a little original. Copying this colorway exactly is almost like making a knockoff….
Speaking of knockoffs, how is the quality on this shoe? It looks like there are no grooves in the elephant print from that picture, but the leather looks decent.
Comment by BKost — July 31, 2008 @ 11:42 pm
LOL! yung albino, I was only kidding…
Just being sarcastic about the print itself, since it’s being used on every shoe (it seems) I might as well throw it in a paint job.
Comment by Darneezy — August 1, 2008 @ 2:49 pm
its okay if the print would be reversed. black frontpart, print at the back
Comment by Ian — August 2, 2008 @ 6:08 am