Up next in 10
Brooks Catamount 3 Review: Still an all-time FAV ???
May 23, 2024
Mike Postaski tests and reviews the Brooks Catamount 3 trail running shoe on trails in Boise, Idaho.
$170. Available now including at our partner Running Warehouse below
Full written multi tester review
https://www.roadtrailrun.com/2024/02/brooks-catamount-3-multi-tester-review.html
Mike's Run Bio
Mike Postaski currently focuses on long mountainous ultras - anywhere from 50K up to his favorite - 100M. 5'10", 138 lbs, midfoot/forefoot striker - he typically averages 70 mpw (mostly on trails), ramping up to 100+ mpw during race buildups. A recent 2:39 road marathoner, his easy running pace ranges from 7:30 - 9:00/mi. From 2022-23 Mike has won the Standhope 100M, IMTUF 100M, and Scout Mountain 100M trail ultras. He also set a CR of 123.74M at the Pulse Endurance Runs 24H and completed the Boise Trails Challenge on foot in 3 days 13 hours, besting the previous record by 7 hours. Mike's shoe preferences lean towards firmer, dense cushioning, and shoes with narrower profiles. He prefers extra forefoot space, especially for long ultras, and he strongly dislikes pointy toe boxes.
Samples were provided at no charge by Brooks for testing purposes. The opinions herein are entirely the author's
100's of Run Shoes and Gear Multi Tester written reviews at www.roadtrailrun.com
SHOP Running Warehouse at the links below for the widest selection of run shoes and gear anywhere and help support our channel!
USA https://tinyurl.com/RWRTRUS
EUROPE https://tinyurl.com/RWRTREU
EU Only: Use RTR code RTR5ALL for 5% off all products, even sale products
AUSTRALIA: https://www.runningwarehouse.com.au/?from=rtr
EUROPE
SHOP Top4Running https://tinyurl.com/bh9t3hpm
Use Code RTRTOP4 for 5% off
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
The Brooks Catamount 2 was one of my all-time favorite trail shoes
0:03
What's new with version 3 and does it maintain its spot on my all-time list
0:18
Hello, this is Mike P from Road Trail Run and today I'll be bringing you my full video review
0:23
of the Brooks Catamount 3. The Catamount 2 was one of my favorite shoes. I love this shoe
0:29
right away as soon as I first put it on my foot. This shoe I found to be extremely versatile. Fast
0:35
50ks, training miles, even a 24-hour race. Great for any type of running. I just simply loved it
0:42
So, like any of you out there that have a model that you just absolutely love, I was a little bit
0:49
unsure what to expect with version 3. I was hoping they didn't screw anything up. The Catamount 3
0:54
comes in at 32 millimeters under the heel and 26 under the forefoot for a 6 millimeter drop
1:01
Spec weight is 9.4 ounces, 266 grams. My US size 10.0 comes in at 9.5 ounces, that's 268 grams
1:11
That's a 0.3 ounce, 10 gram weight drop from version 2 in my US 10. The Catamount 3 retails
1:19
for $170 and it's available now. Essentially, you have a 0.3 ounce weight drop from version 2 to
1:26
version 3. Where did that weight go and what's changed in version 3? First impression when trying
1:31
on the shoe, I took it out of the box, looked at it, oh no, what's going on here? Did they narrow
1:37
this toe box? One of my favorite parts of version 2 was a nice broad, spacious toe box. When I took
1:43
this out of the box, I looked at it and my heart sank a little bit. I thought maybe they reverted
1:48
to the more pointy toe box of version 1, which really didn't work for me. Once I slid them on
1:53
my foot though, I realized that it was only pretty much a visual impression. If you see in this toe
1:58
box, this kind of yellow overlay over the toe box, it kind of gives the impression of a pointiness
2:05
but it's really not pointiness. Side by side with version 2, the toe box and the shape of the upper
2:11
is exactly the same. So version 2 worked for you and it's perfect for your foot as it was for mine
2:17
Version 3, I assure you, is exactly the same. Now, like I said, we did lose 10 grams from version 2
2:22
to version 3. So what are the changes here? Where did that come from? The midsole and the outsole
2:29
remain unchanged from version 2 to version 3. That just leaves the upper. So the upper has been
2:35
slightly updated. The mesh is a little bit less of that scratchy mesh. Version 2 had a little bit
2:41
of a scratchy kind of a feel to it. This looks to be engineered a little bit smoother. Another thing
2:46
the lace loop for the gaiter is gone in the front. That's a little bit of a disappointment
2:51
Actually, in version 2, the lace loop was pretty tiny, which was a little bit odd
2:54
But in the rear, they did lose the Velcro gaiter attachment. This is something that I actually did
2:59
use in my races. Typically, Brooks has been one of the brands that always has that in their trail
3:04
shoes, and I really like that. So it's a little bit of a bummer to lose that here. Perhaps that
3:08
contributed to the 10 gram weight loss. But other than that, the shape of the upper is pretty much
3:13
the same. Nice wide forefoot, tapering, but rounded in the front. Again, what I like in a
3:19
shoe here, this taper along the lateral edge is really rounded out. Nothing that just comes to a
3:26
sharp point. So this really works for my foot. Plenty of space. I'm sized up in a US 10. My true
3:31
to size is a 9.5, but I find that if I can get a nice secure fit in a shoe going a half size up
3:38
and it gives me that little maybe quarter of an inch in front of the toes, I really like to go
3:42
that route, especially if I consider a shoe an ultra distance shoe. And I ran version two for 24
3:47
hours last year. So definitely I wanted to have that kind of little space in version three. And
3:52
I think if you're kind of in between going up that half size, especially if you're a lighter runner
3:57
and you look at maybe you want to take these for a long ultra distance, then I would probably
4:01
recommend going up a half size. If you have a narrower foot or you prefer running in very thin
4:07
socks, you could also stick with your true to size in these. I could actually probably go 9.5
4:12
true to size for me in these, maybe with a thinner sock, probably be just fine for shorter distances
4:17
in training. Moving around the upper here, we have a nice height on the ankle and heel collar here
4:24
regular mesh padding in here, nothing to write home about works just fine. Other trail shoe models
4:31
take note, you don't need a lot here. You just need a little bit of padding, not too high
4:36
not too rigid, and it just works. The heel counter semi rigid, a little more support here
4:41
It's a great heel cup. No issues with heel hold in this shoe. Your heel sits a little bit deeper
4:47
in here. So you really do have a cup coming around the edge of this ankle collar and the top of this
4:53
heel collar. Again, this is nice and soft, nice and smooth, no hard or stiff ridges anywhere
5:00
Just perfect. As you see in the midsole, you have these little wings here. I guess this
5:04
they put this here to give a little bit of stability to the heel collar, maybe integrate
5:09
that feel through to the midfoot. It works well. Going on the interior, we have some underlays in
5:16
here similar to version two. They kind of follow this pattern right here, slightly different than
5:21
version two, but again, similar holds the foot very well, provides the exact same effect. No
5:26
issues there. Light gusset on the tongue. Another thing to mention here, look at this tongue. How
5:31
difficult is it to make a nice tongue? I don't know. Maybe perhaps tongue manufacturing is more
5:37
difficult than I think it is, but here you have about at least a quarter inch, half inch above the
5:42
highest row of laces. No issues with the tongue sliding down and laces jabbing you in the ankle
5:48
It's just a regular tongue and it's perfect. The laces, they did change. We have these kind of
5:52
ribbed laces here. I've seen these in some of Nike's super shoes. I think I have a Vaporfly
5:58
too with these kinds of laces. They feel like they're a little bit lighter than the ones in
6:02
version two. Maybe that's saved a gram or two, but these ribs actually, I find that they hold
6:07
the knot pretty well. So that's a good upgrade. The midsole remains DNA flash nitrogen infused
6:13
super critical EVA. We have 32, 26 millimeters, six mil drop is just perfect. Very versatile
6:20
You don't feel like you're too high up. It's very well balanced. If you look at this shoe
6:25
you don't have any big chunk hanging off the back of the heel. If you look at the rear profile
6:30
you don't have any super wide chunk under the heel. It's just very even throughout. So I find
6:38
that gives a nice balance ride and something that I really enjoy in the shoe. Again, just scratch
6:45
this little dirt over here. We have our SkyVault plate embedded in the midsole. The plate is a
6:53
flexible plate. If you look in these graphics, you can see how the design is fork. You have a
6:58
little bit more on the medial side, and then you have a narrower fork on the lateral side. This
7:04
gives the shoe a good amount of flexibility in all kinds of terrain. I find the SkyVault plate
7:10
that's in the Catamount probably one of the best plates in a trail shoe because it gives you that
7:15
flexibility. See the flex, there's a nice even flex around the forefoot. So for me, especially as a
7:23
midfoot forefoot striker, I'm kind of landing right over here. You don't get that sharp rocker
7:29
flex right at the front of the toes. You get a nice even flex under the ball of the foot
7:35
And as you saw in the video earlier, the lateral flex is really good. A lot of times, if you have
7:41
a rigid plate, even a lot of the carbon fiber plates, one of the issues that they're dealing
7:45
with is dealing with that lateral stiffness. With a carbon fiber plate or any other type of plate
7:51
yes, you're going to get, you want that lever propulsion action. But when you're trail running
7:56
you don't want that lever action going left and right. As you can see, even in hand, I could
8:03
there's a plate in there, but I could kind of flex this laterally. And again, you have a nice wide
8:09
base here under the ball of the foot. So with a plate in a shoe, I find this is about as much flex
8:15
as you could ask for. The outsole is Brooks trail tack rubber. Here we have a little bit of the
8:22
clown puke design, reminiscent of some of Nike's trail shoes in the past. It's on the bottom of
8:26
the shoe. Doesn't bother me. Four millimeter lugs. It gives a nice smooth ride. Four mil's not too
8:32
deep. So it's not the best shoe for mud, deep traction, things like that. You're not going to
8:37
get as much bite as you would with some deeper type of lugs, but it will give you a much smoother
8:42
ride, especially in flat terrain. Four millimeters is good enough for Rocky and mountain terrain
8:47
especially given the flex that I mentioned earlier with the plate and the general wide platform that
8:54
you're running on. You have good ground feel and the four mil lugs I find to be a good match for
8:59
the rest of the shoe. I found Brooks trail tack rubber to be extremely durable. I've got 251 miles
9:06
in my version two catamount, so I'm putting this side by side with my version three catamount, and
9:12
if you look at the profile of these version two lugs, that's 251 miles. Not too much abrasion there
9:37
So the catamount two has one of my favorite rides in any trail shoe of all time. You can go back and
9:48
read our full multi-tester review on roadtrailrun.com. It was actually one of my highest scoring
9:54
shoes of all time. Now version three, the ride is exactly the same. Totally unchanged. The only
9:59
difference is slight changes in the upper, a little bit lighter weight. That always helps. The ride
10:04
exactly the same. I love a flexible trail shoe. As I mentioned earlier
10:09
nice even flex right around the ball of the foot. Just the perfect spot for me laterally and
10:16
torsionally. Just feels like it contours over the terrain when you're running. The nitrogen infused
10:23
midsole, it's a dynamic responsive ride. It's not on the firm side, but I would say if you're
10:28
more used to some of the mushier, softer type of foams, especially higher stack shoes
10:34
if you're used to perhaps running in a speed goat, things like that, you may feel these run on the
10:39
firm side. If you're a lightweight runner, I think this hits the sweet spot. For me, it definitely does
10:59
Either overly soft nor overly firm. It hits right in the middle, very responsive. It feels like you
11:05
get a lot back when you hit the ground. You don't get that sense that that nitrogen infused midsole
11:10
is really compressing or sapping energy. It just feels like it's giving it right back to you with
11:15
a nice wide base. Like I said, something that I love with the responsiveness of the flash midsole
11:20
just one of the top rides out there of any trail shoe. Now, as I mentioned in the intro, I did a
11:25
couple of races right off the bat in 2023 in my version twos, just love them. But then I had to
11:30
test some other shoes. I kind of had them on the shelf, 123 miles in one shot for the 24 hour race
11:36
That's a lot of mileage to put in the midsole. I kind of had the idea in my head that, oh
11:40
maybe they were a little bit worn out. I would take them out once in a while. They still felt
11:45
fine. When I got these, I had to go AB test back with my version two. And I was actually a little
11:50
bit surprised at how fresh my version twos felt at 250 plus miles. There was maybe some slight
11:57
compression around the ball of the foot in the midsole. Again, I'm a midfoot forefoot striker. So
12:03
typically in my shoes, that's the part where I'm going to wear out the shoes the most. I get that
12:08
compression kind of under the balls of the foot and they tend to flatten that area. So a little
12:13
bit in my version twos, but really not that much. I was actually surprised by how close they felt to
12:20
the fresh out of the box version threes with those having 250 plus miles in them. That's
12:25
clearly points for durability. The price is $170, but I don't think that's an issue given the
12:30
versatility of the shoe. You can take these short, you can take these long. For me, it could also be
12:36
an everyday shoe. I could train in this shoe all day long, especially at 9.5 ounces. It just feels
12:42
great. I have that flexibility. I'm not worried about twisting an ankle in training. I have
12:47
enough cushion in training. If I'm just going to knock out miles day to day, this could also be
12:52
the perfect shoe. This could truly be a quiver of one. So does the Brooks Canamount version three
12:57
maintain its spot on my all time top trail running shoe list? Absolutely yes. I just love this shoe
13:06
I recommend it to anyone and everyone that asks for a trail shoe, whether they're a beginner
13:11
experienced, running longer distances, just training, running super long ultras. I just
13:17
think everybody could benefit from having a shoe like this in their rotation. Me personally, I'm
13:22
going to put this one on the shelf. Depending on how my race season shakes out, I'm going to likely
13:26
save these for racing. And given the durability of version two, I'm going to use my version twos
13:32
as a training shoe and save these for those races. I'll be putting a more thorough list of comps up
13:38
on our written review website. The shoe is just so versatile. There's a lot of shoes that are
13:43
comparable across different ranges. Some shoes you could only compare to a narrow subset of other
13:49
trail shoes. This shoe you could kind of compare to a lot of different shoes. If you have any other
13:53
specific shoe in mind that you'd like compared along with any other questions you may have. If
13:57
you enjoy watching these types of video reviews, drop a like, leave a comment. Thank you for watching
14:13
Transcribed by https://otter.ai
#Sports
#Sporting Goods
#Running & Walking