adidas Terrex Agravic 3 Review

Upper

Loucas: "The main material is tough, non-stretch, see-through mesh with generous overlays, underlays, and a gusseted tongue fabric that continues to completely line the forefoot mesh against fine debris. There's good toe bumper protection and strong heel cup structure with good depth sidewalls in the heel to sit down into. The overlays adjoining the midsole create a nearly full perimeter around the shoe. The tongue is beautifully done with thin flexible edges but a nice padding only where it's needed directly under the laces. The padding of the ankle collar and heel cup is spot on as well; it's on the thinner side but with some pleasing squishy depth in the right places.

The fit and locked-down hold were perfect, with the only major exception being the toe box. The tapered design isn't bad compared to some tapers and it's workable for me, but I was pretty much always aware of my pinky toes and especially my big toes pressing against the unforgiving material. On my big toes, I started developing a small hot spot that eventually turned into a callus, but it might've turned into a blister if I hadn't swapped into different shoes for the last hour of a 3-hour run. That said, I was able to enjoyably run in these shoes for 90 to 120 minutes at a time, which is basically all you'll need to get through the huge majority of your daily training. If the toe box gave me even just 1 or 2 millimetres more on each side, this shoe would be flirting with perfection as a reliable workhorse daily trainer. I fully expect it to be quite durable."

Midsole

Loucas: "I'm a fan of the standard Lightstrike foam for the trails, as I tend to like slightly firmer foams such as this. I could see it being a touch too firm for some, maybe on the occasional misstep where you land wrongly on a rock that jolts you a little sideways, but it has just enough cushiony give to it. The underfoot protection and solid deep-seated confidence are immediately apparent from step one. I forgot that there's a TPU stability plate in here, which I guess is a good thing. The plate is designed for torsional stiffness and a smooth ride that you can forget about, so mission accomplished. Uncomfortable rock poke-through simply was not a thing anywhere along the midsole. This shoe is taut and strong, and I really like it. It's not squishy or bouncy, and it's not supposed to be. It's a faithful daily training companion with a predictable, stable, protective nature. Oh, and an 8-mm drop is more than I prefer, so I liked that it felt more level (more like a 5- to 6-mm drop) than I expected."

Outsole

Loucas: "Continental rubber and burly 4-mm lugs (5 mm around the perimeter): check and check. And wow, literally 100% full coverage. I'm having a hard time thinking of another shoe that doesn't have any cutouts, channels, or exposed foam. The grip was fantastic. This was a summertime testing period in the American Southeast, so these shoes went through plenty of heat, humidity, and trail-dampening thunderstorms on technical terrain with plenty of rocks. In full disclosure, I didn't do hard tempo (race-adjacent effort) in this shoe, but the traction would've been up to that task, and I never even thought about the grip or doubted it."

Comparable Models

Loucas: "All you medium-stacked normal daily trainers, line up! Okay, maybe not all. The Saucony Peregrine and Salomon Genesis feature prominently in my mind (and on our "Best Of" lists), but both of those possess more performance versatility, even though they're only about 15 grams lighter than the Agravic 3. The Brooks Cascadia, ASICS Gel Trabuco, and Salomon Thundercross for sure seem like even closer references. At the end of the day, the Agravic 3 presents a very solid case with its reasonable weight, low price, full-coverage outsole, and durable construction."

adidas Agravic 3 vs. Brooks Cascadia 18

"The Cascadia has an essentially identical stack and drop, but is almost a full ounce heavier than the Agravic 3. I don't want to sound rude, but I look at the Cascadia as the reference definition of 'just a shoe,' but again that can actually be a positive attribute. The Cascadia is also certified carbon neutral. Ultimately, I feel like I'd get a bit more performance versatility from the Agravic 3." 

adidas Agravic 3 vs. ASICS Gel Trabuco 12

"The Gel Trabuco (not to be confused with the Trabuco Max) is nominally 2 mm taller throughout and about half an ounce heavier. This toss-up might come down to foam and grip compound preferences: Lightstrike and Continental versus FF Blast and ASICSGRIP."

adidas Agravic 3 vs. Salomon Thundercross

"The Thundercross is trivially (8 grams) lighter but with less foam under the heel, virtually identical stack under the forefoot, and a more level 4-mm drop. The Thundercross also gives the impression of tank-like durability with overlays surrounding the full perimeter, which generally results in delayed drainage and dry-out times. Do you prefer the Quicklace system and the extra burliness of the Salomon, or the regular laces, better drainage, and perfectly good protection of the adidas?"