PUMA Fast-R NITRO™ 3
A new independent study confirms that PUMA’s latest marathon shoe delivers running economy gains that surpass the limits set by previous “super shoes.”
The Research Begins
A team led by Wouter Hoogkamer at the University of Massachusetts Amherst (UMass Amherst) tested a prototype of the PUMA Fast-R 3, developed using advanced computer simulation and design optimization. The results: up to 3.6% improvement in running economy, far beyond the typical 1–1.5% gains seen since super shoes emerged in 2016.
The Shoes That Were Tested
The study compared four top-tier advanced footwear technology (AFT) models:
- Nike Alphafly 3
- Adidas Adios Pro Evo 1
- PUMA Fast-R 2
- PUMA Fast-R 3 (prototype)
Why Running Economy Matters
Think of running economy like fuel efficiency in a car. The better it is, the less energy you use at a given pace. For example, if you run at a 7-minute mile, improved running economy means using less energy to maintain that pace.
“If I go out there and run at a 7-minute-mile pace, I would be using a specific amount of energy. If I train for years, I will improve my running economy, and at that same 7-minute pace, I will use less energy.” says Wouter Hoogkamer, assistant professor of kinesiology at UMass Amherst
Note: Hoogkamer also led the 2016 Nike Vaporfly study that showed a 4% gain in running economy — essentially revolutionizing marathon performance.
Breaking the Plateau
Since the rise of super shoes, most new models have offered only marginal gains. But the PUMA prototype changed that.
These are substantial differences. You’re talking about minutes off a marathon time, and I train years to shave a minute off of my marathon time.” said Hoogkamer.
The Results
- The PUMA prototype improved running economy by 3.15% to 3.62% over the other shoes.
- All 15 test runners improved their efficiency — none performed worse.
- Even the least responsive runner saw a 1% gain.
- If Edna Kiplagat (2:23:21 at Boston 2024) had worn this shoe, she could theoretically have run 2:20:13, beating the winner’s time.
Real-World Feedback from Test Runner Meaghan (Believe in the Run)
Meaghan (Believe in the Run), one of the 15 test runners, said:
“According to Puma’s data, I performed 2.5% better in the Fast-R 3 compared to the Alphafly 3. This would theoretically lower my 2:45 marathon PR to a 2:41”
Although she couldn’t race in the shoe due to a pre-release embargo, Meaghan planned to test them in a half marathon during her London Marathon buildup.
What Makes the Fast-R 3 Different
PUMA used a data-driven computational design process, skipping early physical prototypes. Key innovations include:
- Foam placement and midsole geometry optimized for energy return
- Carbon plate stiffness fine-tuned for maximum propulsion
- Weight reduction: 80g lighter than its predecessor (9US 170g)
- Energy return: ~3% better vs other super shoes, giving a trampoline-like feel vs. a sand-like one
“However, it’s still a little murky on which features we need to turn the knobs higher on and lower on, but the process is really what has gotten them there,” said John Kuzmeski, a doctoral student at UMass and research assistant at UMILL.
Testing Tools: Instron ElectroPuls 10000
The research team used the Instron ElectroPuls 10000 to simulate real-world landing forces and analyze midsole foam behavior. This high-precision system measures how materials perform under extreme linear and torsional loads, essential for understanding fatigue and energy return in running shoes.
Findings: the foam in the Fast-R 3 showed ~3% more energy return, helping runners bounce off the ground more efficiently.
Potential for Custom Shoes
Hoogkamer also notes that this demonstrates the feasibility of creating computationally optimized custom footwear. “This shoe was developed based on average data for several runners at a specific range of speeds,” he says, but it theoretically would be possible to put in an individual runner’s data to generate a shoe that meets their specific needs.
Research Notes
- This study is in pre-print and funded by PUMA.
- The researchers declare no influence from PUMA on the findings.
- One co-author (Laura Healey) is a PUMA employee.
- Hoogkamer’s lab has received past funding from PUMA and Saucony.
While these factors may slightly reduce the study’s perceived neutrality, transparency and the forthcoming peer-review process will help verify the claims. Runners and readers should stay tuned for further validation.