I ran 70 miles in the New Balance FuelCell SC Trainer v3 — here’s my verdict

The New Balance FuelCell SC Trainer v3 is an upgrade on past models and one of the best running shoes for marathon training you can get, with the bouncy midsole and carbon plate creating a comfortable and fast ride that shines on long runs in particular.

I enjoyed using the shoe and racked up a lot of miles in it as part of my training for the Valencia Marathon, but in my New Balance SC Trainer v3 review I’ll explain why I think there are better options on the market, with the Hoka Mach X2 and Saucony Endorphin Speed 4 being my standouts in the super-trainer category.

New Balance FuelCell SC Trainer v3 review: price and availability

The New Balance SC Trainer v3 launched in August 2024 and costs $180 in the U.S. and £230 in the U.K.. In the U.S. its price is in line with other plated training shoes, which do come at a premium, while in the U.K. the price of the SC Trainer v3 is very high and actually makes it more expensive than some of the best carbon plate running shoes for races.

New Balance FuelCell SC Trainer v3 review: design and fit

The SC Trainer v3 has changed a lot across three generations of the shoe. The original New Balance SuperComp Trainer had a very high midsole stack and was a very bouncy shoe, while the New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Trainer v2 reduced the stack height and toned down the ride to make it more stable.

I wasn’t a huge fan of either, but the SC Trainer v3 is an improvement, keeping the same stack height as the second version of the shoe but improving the midsole foam. It stands 40mm tall at the heel and 34mm at the forefoot for a 6mm drop, and weighs in at 9.8oz in a men’s size 9.5, which is fairly light for a high stack shoe like this.

The shoe fit me well in my normal running shoe size. It’s not cramped in the toe-box and the heel and midfoot held my foot securely on the run. However, there’s not much padding at the heel, and some might find they get a bit of heel slip with the shoe, so heel-locking it might be advisable.

It’s currently available in one color for the men’s and women’s shoe — the white with cyber jade version I tested – and two widths.

Upper

The SC Trainer v3 has an engineered mesh upper that has minimal padding around the heel and tongue. It’s not quite as stripped back as the upper on the New Balance SC Elite v4, but it’s still very lightweight and breathable.

I found the upper comfortable throughout all my runs, including a couple of 15-milers, and had no problems with it rubbing my heel or toes, but I do know other runners who have had trouble with the upper on the SC Trainer v3, so if you can try it on and see if you might need half a size up that would be worth doing.

Midsole

The midsole on the SC Trainer v3 is still called FuelCell, as with previous models, but it’s a new formulation of the material that’s made from a blend of PEBA and EVA foams — it’s 20% PEBA, like the foam on the New Balance FuelCell Rebel v4. Your foot sits within sidewalls of this foam to add more stability on the run.

There is a carbon plate running through the midsole that forks under the forefoot, which reduces the weight a little compared to a full plate. A long cutout runs down the middle of the bottom of the shoe, stopping just before the forefoot.

Outsole

Aside from the cutout on the shoe there is good rubber coverage on the bottom of the SC Trainer v3, with a thick layer on the forefoot and two strips at the heel to cover the key impact areas. I’ve been running in the shoe in autumn in the UK and it has gripped well on wet pavements, and there are no signs of wear after 70 miles of use.

New Balance FuelCell SC Trainer v3 review: running performance

I found that the SC Trainer v3 felt a bit stiff and flat for my first couple of runs in the shoe, but after that it has broken in and livened up considerably. It now feels softer and bouncier, and it’s been ideal for the high-mileage weeks of marathon training I’ve been using it for.

It’s a versatile shoe that can handle a variety of runs — I’ve done easy runs, progression runs, and track and road sessions in the shoe, and even used it for both runs on a double threshold workout day.

The ride is not very soft and squishy, but instead the resiliency in the foam combined with the pop from the plate makes holding faster paces feel a bit easier. It’s not a light shoe that felt great for flat out reps, but instead one that made cruising through longer sessions like 4 x 4km or a 15-mile easy to steady progression feel more comfortable and enjoyable.

In sessions I found the shoe worked well down to around my marathon pace of 5min 40sec/mile. If I pushed beyond that for reps at 5K or 10K pace it felt a bit cumbersome, and other super-trainers like the Endorphin Speed 4 and Mach X2 do feel better for those faster intervals.

For racking up a lot of miles at a range of speeds the SC Trainer v3 was great though, and it protects the legs well so you feel a bit fresher the day after a long workout. It also looks great, which made it a great choice for the only shoe I took on a weekend away, handling all my runs and general use.

Should you buy the New Balance FuelCell SC Trainer v3?

I think the New Balance FuelCell SC Trainer v3 is a great running shoe and if you love the look of it and are lining up a marathon training block, it will work well for a range of runs. However, the category it competes in is full of outstanding shoes, and I think the Saucony Endorphin Speed 4 and Hoka Mach X2 are more versatile options that are better for speedwork in particular.

It’s also more expensive than some other great options, especially in the UK, like the Mizuno Neo Vista which is a very bouncy and fun shoe that is great for daily training and long runs. Non-plated options like the Hoka Mach 6 and New Balance Rebel v4 are also good cheaper alternatives, even if they’re not as good for long workouts as a plated shoe.

If you do want a plate-free shoe to handle all the same runs as the SC Trainer v3 the Asics Superblast 2 is a great option, though it’s more expensive (in the U.S., it’s actually cheaper in the U.K.).