The North Face Summit VECTIV Pro 3 Review
Specifications & Fit
Shoe Specs
| Weight | Unisex: 10.7 oz (Men's size 9/Women's size 10.5) |
| Stack Height | 43 mm (Heel), 37 mm (Forefoot) | 6 mm Heel-Toe Offset |
| Terrain | Trail |
| Stability | Neutral |
| Sizing | True to Size |
Individual Thoughts
Every long run I have done in the Summit Pro 3s has given me new insight into when I should be using them and when I should select another shoe instead. The 30 kilometre I did with a lot of climbing and rocky terrain had my pinky toes yelling at me by about halfway through because of the wings in the forefoot. They simply don’t feel comfortable enough for me to wear on uneven and steep sections. The next time I took them out for 26 kilometres, they shined on lots of runnable, rolling hills. My pinky toes were not screaming at me, and I had a blast running some faster intervals.
What I miss about the Pro 1 and Pro 2 is the versatility. The extra 4mm of foam makes them less versatile for me on technical ground and adds unnecessary extra weight. I also notice the wings more on v3. In my perfect world, v4 would have the upper of v3, the stack of v2, and modify or get rid of the winged design. I want this to be my unicorn shoe, but I think it needs a couple of modifications to get it there.
The North Face designed the Summit VECTIV Pro 3 to be the ultimate tool for LONG (let’s say 100-milers) distances on mixed terrain. So long as the forefoot wings don’t bother you, this is a truly excellent shoe for that purpose.
For my normal weekly training on usually tricky technical terrain, I don’t necessarily see myself eagerly reaching for the Pro 3 over and over again. But again, to be fair, that’s not what it’s designed for. Make no mistake, this shoe was very nicely and broadly capable over the technical terrain I tested on (East coast Appalachian-adjacent), despite its appreciable mass. I’m well-pleased with how it performed, especially given how tall and complicated it is. I especially appreciated how stable and protected it felt underfoot. If I DID have a 100K or 100-miler on moderate terrain, including some technical sections, I’d happily reach for it.
Our In-Depth Look
Upper
Becky: "I love the upper materials - they wrap the foot securely and are breathable. The heel collar and tongue provide extra comfort. My issue with the upper is where the wing design contact the mesh. It caused rubbing/irritation for me on technical terrain or when doing a lot of steep climbs/descents."
Loucas: "The upper material is of the tough “plasticky” mesh type, which brought to mind the material of the Agravic Speed Ultra. I like the interior padding piece along the ankle sides and Achilles. The thinner and firmer material which makes direct contact with your ankles/socks (extending higher than the padding) needed only a couple normal runs to break in comfortably.
This is a “deep” / high volume shoe, which should be great for those that need more height in their uppers. I was able to dial in excellent overall lockdown, for my narrow foot (medium-high arch, but fairly low volume). Initially, I cinched every eyelet row down too tightly, which was a mistake for the lowest 1 or 2 eyelets closest to the forefoot. Having those too tight will increase the chances of feeling the forefoot plate wings. Once I loosened those bottom 2 eyelets a touch, I had close to ideal forefoot comfort. Testing involved multiple runs totalling roughly 8 hours, almost entirely on challenging technical terrain. In that time, I was only momentarily aware of wing pressure on one side of my forefoot.
Along those lines, it took several runs to develop a small blister (a rarity for me) on the medial side of one big toe. The blister area is suspiciously close to the forefoot plate wing, but I’m quite confident the blister is from the tapered toe box fit itself rather than the wing. The toe box fit at the metatarsal heads is nicely accommodating, but it tapered just slightly too much towards the toe tips. Overall, from the met heads back through the arch and heel, the fit and lockdown are close to perfect for me. Lastly, I had no issues with breathability or drainage. Although I didn’t fully submerge it to test drying time, I wouldn’t expect any issues, due to the open mesh design with no liner."
Midsole
Becky: "I love Dream foam in all of the TNF trail shoes- Enduris 4, Altamesa 500, and Summit series. It’s bouncy, balanced (not too soft or too firm), and shines in the Summit Pro 3, when on smoother trails and at faster paces."
Loucas: "The combined feel of the midsole hits an ideal sweet spot for me. I like that it’s on the firmer side, but with the just right amount of give before rebounding. The TPU top plate cradles your arch on both sides of your foot, which added stability to the foam. I didn’t feel anything close to WOW bounce and propulsion, but I don’t want that in a trail shoe. Regardless, I can tell that the just-right bounce and efficiency benefits are there.
Now, this shoe is THICK-stacked and double-plated, so you guessed correctly that it’s quite stiff longitudinally, but the toe spring curvature works perfectly for a smooth roll. Further, there’s zero sense of the curvature being too aggressive and throwing you forward. I’ll note that the forefoot base width is ridiculously wide. I can’t help but feel it’s unnecessary. Given the firmness of the foam, plus the stabilising top plate, I don’t think the forefoot base would have to be quite this wide, which limits deft foot placement and agility on the most challenging technical terrain. However, the effect of being cradled and stabilised feels confidently planted. For such a tall and complicated shoe to enable consistently confident foot placement and stability is quite an impressive feat."
Outsole
Becky: "I had no grip issues, including going down steep descents. However, I can’t say with confidence how the outsole would perform on wet surfaces compared to something with Vibram Megagrip, and probably would not be my top choice on slick trails.
Loucas: "No qualms here, the outsole seems ideally suited to its task: to handle challenging mixed terrain (not the EXTREMES of technicality) with a setup that’s the sweet spot of smooth runnability and rugged capability. The lug shapes, spacing, and depth all seem to hit the "just right blend" spot on. I didn’t encounter big sections of wet stone, just the occasional 1 or 2 steps on slick rocks, and this does seem to be a grippier/stickier SURFACE CTRL compound, complete with some micro-texture detailing on areas of the base between the lugs. The full-length one-piece execution gives me a good optimism for grip and durability."
Comparable Model
The North Face Summit VECTIV Pro 3 vs. HOKA Tecton X3
Becky: "I have put a lot of miles in other carbon plated, high stack height trail shoes over the last couple of years. The Summit Pro v1 and v2 were my favourite shoes in the category. I also love the Tecton X, which feels more stable and works better for me for longer distances than Summit Pro. The Summit Pro 3 has limitations because of the winged design in the forefoot, and overall comfort is a concern after a few hours."
Loucas: "I found the Tecton X3 to be significantly softer than the Summit Pro 3, with a very pleasant and bouncy plushness. However, the Tecton felt too unstable at the heel/ankle for my preferences. On the positive, the Tecton’s upper material is buttery smooth and comfortable, and it’s Vibram Megagrip Traction Lugs is more aggressive.
I feel the protected underfoot for long distances (involving hiking) in the Tecton and the Summit Pro. For stability, it’s the Summit Pro all day. However, note that it’s about an ounce heavier than the Tecton."
