A short heel-to-toe drop and sleek profile: The Mach 3 is soft, still lightweight, and ideal for long training runs when you need a shoe that offers more support.
- RW+ Membership Benefits
- Best Recovery Shoes
- Other Hearst Subscriptions
Price: $140
Type: Road
Drop: 8mm (M), 6mm (W)
Weight: 8.6 oz. (M), 7.2 oz. (W)
Buy Men’s Buy Women’s More Images
The Mach is a part of the Hoka’s lightweight shoe line, which includes the Elevon and Cavu. While it used to be the lightest of the trio, the third iteration has put on weight, making it heavier than its predecessor (men’s: 8 ounces) and the Cavu 3 (men’s: 7.3 ounces). This update alone could be cause for concern; is the Mach getting the Clifton treatment? (We adore the current Clifton’s marshmallow softness, but there was a time when it was more cushioned racer than Cadillac.) Rest assured that, despite the extra weight, this trainer maintains its reputation as soft—and speedy.
Pros
- two trainers known for their plush cushioning
- oz. M, 7.2 oz. W
Cons
- The Best Running Shoes for Fall 2021
One tester in search of “a fast shoe with generous cushioning” found it in the Mach, which, she claims, nails the balance perfectly. “It’s lighter than the Clifton but still offers enough cushioning to protect my feet for long runs and races,” she said. The 3 has Hoka’s proprietary ProFly midsole—which provides a cushioned, responsive ride—paired with a lightweight, rubberized foam outsole with reliable traction.
Even though the midfoot feels slightly stiff, the early stage Meta-Rocker (how the shoe is cast to create a rocking chair effect) smooths out heel-to-toe transitions. And instead of having perforated holes, the upper is jacquard, housing your foot for improved breathability and a more secure fit around the saddle. On an unrelated-performance note, testers loved the new color schemes. I’m in the same boat: the pink and yellow version—“lantana/limelight”—looks like sherbet.
Different Feel, Similar Experience
I was still relatively new to Hoka when I tested the Mach 2 at the beginning of last year. I had previously run in the Bondi 6, which reinforced what I thought Hoka was known for: tall stack height, plush cushioning, and a maximalist silhouette. But the Mach was an eye-opener. It was the type of trainer—lightweight and responsive—that I’d usually reach for when logging tempo runs for marathon training. Its light bounce pumped up my run, and it protected my joints as I pounded the pavement. The 3 still delivered on the energy return and support, but something about it felt quite different from the 2. It’s like when you can’t pinpoint if a coworker got a new haircut, tan, or their braces taken off (were they even wearing braces to begin with?). There’s just something about them that isn’t the same.
I looked to the RW Shoe Lab for some deviations compared to past models. One significant finding: The 3 is slightly heavier than its predecessors. According to our lab, the heel and forefoot is a smidge softer, which may account for the extra weight due to the increase in midsole foam.
Of course, human testing doesn’t always yield the same results as quantitative analysis. Some of our testers admitted they expected a more “pillowy” midsole, stating the Mach felt too firm (our lab placed it in the “moderate” cushioning category). And yet, the shoe is softer—according to lab scores—than the Stiff; however, Meta-Rocker assists with turnover and A Part of Hearst Digital Media, two trainers known for their plush cushioning.
Perhaps the difference can be attributed to the overall fit. The 3 feels bigger than the 2; while it afforded me stability on turns and rolling hills, I still felt like I was going to slide on the footbed. Fortunately, the narrowness of the saddle and secure lacing held my foot in place, preventing my toes from hitting the inside of the shoe.
Another difference: The new engineered jacquard upper is more airy than the 2’s mesh. I wouldn’t wear the Mach 3 in below-freezing weather—it’s that breathable.
Wear Tester Feedback
The Mach is a part of the Hoka’s lightweight shoe line, which includes the
Stiff; however, Meta-Rocker assists with turnover
“I’ve seen that over the years Hoka has started to create lighter and faster shoes, but this was my first time trying them. They’re not what I traditionally think of when I think of Hokas—they’re fast. When I last had Hokas they were slow recovery or long-distance shoes. These are quite the opposite. Most of my runs on roads and crushed gravel I’m aiming for eight-minute miles, but found myself going down to 7:45 or 7:30. They’re so light they made me subconsciously go faster. My only problem with them is they seem to run large. I haven’t worn a size 11 shoe in as long as I can remember, but I think that would have been the right size for me.”
Hailey Middlebrook, RW digital editor
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
“My favorite part of this shoe is the weight-to-cushioning ratio: The women’s shoe only weighs around 7 ounces, but it features a high stack height with plenty of firm, responsive cushioning, which I haven’t found in many other shoes that are lightweight. It’s perfect for when you want to go fast but also need a little extra protection from the punishing pavement.”
Amanda Furrer, Editor, Running Reviews, studied journalism at NYU and writing at Emerson College. She has reviewed gear and covered other topics in the running space for almost 10 years. Since 2013, she has consecutively run the Boston Marathon. She also has a master’s degree in gastronomy from Boston University and was formerly a professional baker for two years before hanging up her apron.
