Saucony Axon 3 review

We believe the Saucony Axon 3 is an excellent choice for:

• Any runner seeking a shoe that's easy on the wallet and offers plenty of cushioning and comfort.
• Beginners in the sport keen to find one of the best bang-for-the-buck shoes in the market.
• Those that seek a durable trainer, especially for midfoot and forefoot strikers, as it has a lower drop than usual.

If you're an extreme heel striker, the Axon might not be the best fit, given its low-drop geometry. You'd be better off with the Nike Winflo 10, which offers a higher offset while maintaining many of the Axon's features, including its affordability.

Additionally, the Axon 3 caters more to those with wider feet and may not be suitable for runners with narrow feet. In that's you, we recommend opting for a narrower option like the Brooks Trace 2, which should provide a better fit for your wider foot shape.

In the heel, there's a substantial stack height of 33.6 mm. However, it doesn't feel like a max-stacked, maximalist shoe. It's more akin to a really cushioned daily trainer, which everyone seems happy with, as it remains consistent with last year's version.

In the forefoot, we measured 27.9 mm, which is also above what most daily trainers offer and quite surprising, given the shoe's low weight. We're still amazed at how Saucony managed to create a shoe this cushioned and affordable for just $100.

With such a generous stack in the forefoot area, those who use a forefoot striking technique are well accommodated with the Axon 3. This is particularly important, considering the shoe's low-drop geometry.

We mentioned just before that this shoe leans toward a low-drop geometry, although it's higher than Saucony's stated figure.

They claim a 4-mm offset, but according to World Athletics standards, we measured it at 5.7 mm. Regardless, this isn't a big deal, and the shoe still feels like it has a lower drop compared to other models and it's ideal for those who favor less steep shoes.

The trend in running shoe foams leans towards becoming softer each year, and the Axon 3 follows suit.

After assessing the PWRRUN foam with our Durometer, we recorded a softness of 18.3 HA, making it 22% softer than the Axon 2.

In our tests, the midsole felt definitively softer and more plush, marking another step forward in its evolution.

Under cold temperatures, the PWRRUN midsole remained consistent, showing only a 20.2% change in softness. This difference probably won't be noticeable to most runners.

The insole is pretty straightforward, and it does its job well. We measured it at 4.7 mm, which is pretty much the standard thickness we find in most shoes.

In the widest part of the toebox, we measured a generous 100.4 mm. This makes the shoe particularly suitable for those with wide feet.

This wider upper is especially crucial since Saucony doesn't produce this shoe in a 2E width, leaving the standard width as the only option.

If there was one major drawback of the Axon 2, it was its tapered toebox, which made the shoe quite uncomfortable for many runners, especially in the big toe area.

This time, they've made it 10 mm wider than before (77.7 mm), a change that significantly enhances comfort.

Now, let's talk about stability. There's no way around it—the shoe, although still reasonably stable for its height, can't be considered as stable as its predecessor because of the softer foam.

Since it's very similar to the previous model, we expected the Axon to be quite rigid, as has been consistent with this line.

We found it scored 4 out of 5 for rigidity. Therefore, we think runners who prefer a more flexible, natural ride should consider other options, like the Brooks Launch 10.

In the heel counter, there are subtle changes aimed at reducing stiffness, which was previously uncomfortable for some runners, resembling a stability trainer rather than a daily running shoe.

This time we've clocked it at 3 out of 5 for stiffness, striking a good balance. We found it to be really comfortable, a notable improvement that enhances the overall running experience especially when tackling long runs.

Shifting to the midsole's dimensions, we measured the forefoot at just 108.8 mm, narrower than what we typically see in the lab.

This design choice aligns with the goal of reducing weight, but it could raise concerns for runners with mild stability needs who have a forefoot striking technique.

In the heel, we found exactly the opposite situation—the shoe has grown by 9%, which is significant in this test. In fact, it could now be considered a wide shoe in the heel area, and we have an idea why these changes occurred.

Basically, the Axon 3 is primarily aimed at beginners due to its low MSRP. With a less steep drop than most daily trainers, there's a higher likelihood of runners landing on their heels. So, Saucony widened the heel area—dead simple!

Another concern with the Axon 2 was its incredible stiffness. In fact, in our 90-degree bend test, we had to apply 39.9N of force, whereas this year's model required only 30.4N.

This result aligns more with our expectations for this kind of shoe, but the Axon 3 still tends toward being stiff, both torsionally and longitudinally, as our lab tests have demonstrated.

We conducted the 20-minute freezer test again to gauge the shoe's stiffness in harsh winter conditions. After the test, we found a need to make 17.6% more force to bend the shoe. This subtle change highlights once more the solid performance of the PWRRUN compound, even under challenging winter conditions.

Most budget-friendly running shoes tip the scales at well over 10 ounces, as brands typically use cheaper, heavier materials.

Saucony, however, took the exact opposite approach and crafted the ultimate lightweight, wallet-friendly shoe, weighing in at just 8.6 oz (244g). Oh, and let's not overlook this—it's 1.3 oz lighter than the Axon 2. Now that's what we'd call going on a proper diet...

Right off the bat, the Axon 3 seemed to have everything needed for optimal breathability—a perforated, thin engineered mesh free from obstructive, TPU overlays. We were eager to see how it would perform in our smoke test.

As expected, it did quite well. While it didn't earn the max score, a 4 out of 5 is still an impressive result for a budget-friendly shoe. And this is especially great for winter use, where top-notch breathability isn't always a plus.

When we placed the cut-in-half shoe under the light, it revealed hundreds of ventilation holes, not just in the toebox. The upper resembled that of a premium shoe in its precision and quality.

To examine the mesh even more closely, we headed to our microscope in the lab. 

Under the microscope, the upper looked stunning, featuring a double-layer mesh that masterfully balances comfort with ventilation.

In our final manual assessment of the upper, we noted it's not as padded and stretchy as some other shoes, but we never felt discomfort. However, this is something to keep in mind if you prefer knitted, Ultraboost-like uppers.

With so many ventilation holes, we think durability might be compromised. After all, each hole is a potential ripping point. But a lot depends on the strength of the mesh.

Luckily, the engineered mesh Saucony uses is quite tough based on our Dremel test. So, despite the numerous holes, it managed to score an average 2 out of 5 for durability.

The heel area boasts a rougher fabric, which, on paper, suggests enhanced durability and a reduced risk of heel slippage, as it firmly holds the feet in place.

Moreover, after conducting our Dremel test, we found barely any damage, earning it an outstanding maximum score of 5 out of 5 for durability!

Encouraged by the last positive result, we were eager to test the outsole. Our first step was to determine the hardness value of the Carbon Rubber outsole.

Measuring 82.5 HC on our Shore C durometer, it earned a standard score—exactly what you'd anticipate in a daily trainer. This represents a balanced mix of durability and grip, aligning well with the shoe's overall performance.

Given the outsole's average hardness, we anticipated typical durability from our final Dremel test.

What we discovered in the lab didn't disappoint us at all—a mere 0.7-mm indentation. This result assures solid performance in terms of wear and tear, even if you frequently run on gravel paths or dirt roads.

Adding to the good news, there's even more to be excited about in terms of durability. Despite the shoe feeling incredibly light—we'll weigh it in just a moment—it boasts a substantial rubber thickness of 3.9 mm!

For just $100, we got a really good shoe with the Axon 3, so we're okay with Saucony saving reflective elements for their higher-end models. If they have to cut costs somewhere, this is the place.

The tongue features average padding at 5.0 mm, which we think is a smart approach. Considering the shoe's signature low weight, opting for thicker padding would have been counterproductive.

This thoughtful balance adds just enough comfort without compromising the Axon's lightweight appeal.

For just 100 bucks, you get features often reserved for pricier shoes, and one of them is the semi-gusseted tongue.

It's amazing, offering a solid, comfortable lockdown that's usually found in more expensive models.

In the heel, there's a horizontal finger-loop heel tab. In our humble opinion, it doesn't look quite as good as the classic vertical ones, but it's definitely better than having none at all!

The insole is fully removable since it's not glued in place. As an added bonus, it's printed with the shoe's 4-mm heel-to-toe offset. However, our measurements indicated a different one as we explained before...