UNDER ARMOUR HOVR MACHINA 3 REVIEW | HIGH MILEAGE RUNNING TRAINER W/ DUAL-DENSITY MIDSOLE - SO GOOD! 

I haven't tried the Sonic 5s either; what shoes get reviewed often comes down to the brand. If they aren't pushing the shoes, they won't send review samples to reviewers so unless people start buying them en masse, they won't get reviewed, sadly.

There is no wrong choice with any U.A. Sonic but 3. For me it was the worst Sonic ever, very slippery, size 42.5(my normal U.A. size) EU was too small and fixed, size 43 was too big for me. I can speak only on my behalf, maybe there are people who get along with Sonic 3. I got along very well with Sonic 2 and with Sonic 4 and from what I've seen into the Sonic 5 it remains a good shoe for its price for neutral beginner to intermediate runners, not too fast, not too slow. But if you're tending to the next level of a semi pro runner, Sonic is out of the question, not suitable for fast runs, only for easy and recovery.

I have the sonic 4 and just got the 5s. They have a narrower toe box than the 4s so going a half size up

Wow, an Under Armour expert! Thanks for your comment, much appreciated. I agree regarding the marketing of UA shoes and also that you need lightweight fun shoes. The Adidas and the NB are top choices!

Good description of the Hovr Sonics. I've run in two pair -- the Hovr Sonic 1, which I still prefer, and the Hovr Sonic 2 -- for a bunch of miles. Just topped over 600 miles in the Hovr Sonic 2 but the heel outsole wore through at 500 miles so it's a walking shoe now. The Sonic 1 has over 400 miles and plenty of wear left. I think the plain white midsole feels better and the carbon black outsole lasts longer. I recall reading a tech-oriented industry article on Boost and other midsoles, a few years ago, in which the engineer mentioned how adding dyes or altering any materials can change the running feel and wear. That seems to match my experience. The Sonic 1 pair has a plain white midsole and carbon black outsole, and feels the best and wears great. The Sonic 2 midsole was fancied up with a black-to-gray fade midsole, and partially translucent outsole. The midsole always felt stiffer and less responsive, and the outsole wore much more quickly. That may be a factor in the very different opinions by various reviewers, if they're comparing the same shoe with different color midsoles and outsoles. I've considered the UA Hovr Machina for awhile, but the new Hovr Turbulence might suit me better. I tried a pair in the store this week and walked around in the store for about 15 minutes, bouncing on my toes, heels, etc. Feels great, like an updated Hovr Sonic with thicker midsole, especially the forefoot. I felt almost an inch taller, but they felt stable just walking around. I'd welcome a slightly thicker Hovr sole, as my feet are a bit more sensitive with age now that I'm 65. AU appears to have omitted the protective material from the heel area on the Turbulence, so the Hovr midsole is more exposed. I'm guessing this may deliver a better running feel. The Hovr midsole material seems as durable as Boost and doesn't break down, compress and take a set, and doesn't seem vulnerable to crackling, so it probably didn't need that additional protective material on the Sonics. Unfortunately the Hovr Turbulence lacks the Bluetooth sensor, so no data sync with Map My Run. That was a big factor for me with the Hovr Sonics when I resumed running in early 2020 after decades away from running (I'm primarily a cyclist). The near-realtime feedback from the app to my earbuds reminded me to avoid over-striding, maintain a cadence range, and mind my heart rate. Helped me avoid injury and develop a good foundation. I don't use the MMR app often now, but did for a year and it was very useful.

How about the north face vectiv? www.sportsshoes.com/product/tnf523/the-north-face-flight-vectiv-trail-running-shoes-~-ss22/

Thank you! 🙌

Absolutely 👌

You are correct! The Flow Velociti Wind uses the Warp upper, however, the "engineered warp spacer upper" used in the HOVR Machina 3 is different from that.

I agree, there are many shoes with better specs but I appreciate that the Machina 3 is much more comfortable than the previous iteration and that foam lifecycle is also pretty good. 😉

“Better” is subjective

That seems to be the conventional wisdom about Under Armour running shoes -- that they aren't competitive with Nike, Brooks, Adidas, Saucony, etc. But I suspect it's based on internet lore without substance, rather than direct experience. UA does a poor job of marketing its shoes or distinguishing between its lifestyle/casual shoes and running shoes. There are fewer RU-vid reviews for UA running shoes, and those few are often years old. In early 2020 I found a couple of pair of UA Hovr Sonics, versions 1 and 2, for about $25 a pair discounted at Marshalls or Ross stores. At that price I was wiling to try 'em. They quickly became my favorite trainers, over my Adidas and Nike, especially for summer use -- the mesh uppers have no liner so they're very breathable, and unlike the Adidas Prime knit material of a few years ago, the UA mesh uppers are supportive and don't feel like running in socks with soles. Over the past couple of years since resuming running in January 2020, I've put double the mileage in those UA Hovr Sonics than I have in my Adidas SL20 or Solar Boost, Nike Pegasus or others. The Hovr Sonics aren't particularly lightweight or fast but they're great trainers, neutral feeling and well balanced all around. And very durable so they're excellent values. The Sonic uppers will outlast the soles and are so comfortable for hot weather wear I might consider having them resoled if possible to retain them as walking shoes. I liked 'em well enough to consider the new Hovr Turbulence as my next trainers, rather than buying a second pair of Pegasus 39.