Topo Cyclone 3  Running Shoe Review

Reviewed Nov 13, 2025 at 11:32am
Tested using Methodology v0.8.2 
Topo Cyclone 3
5.4
Marathon Racing 
7.6
5K/10K Racing 
6.3
Energy Return 
4.6
Cushioning 
8.6
Lateral Stability 
 0

We've tested these running shoes to expand our database and allow users to compare results to help with their buying decisions. We don't expect to write a full review, but if you have any questions about this product, please let us know!

Our Verdict

5.4
Marathon Racing 
7.6
5K/10K Racing 
6.3
Energy Return 
4.6
Cushioning 
8.6
Lateral Stability 
  • 5.4
    Marathon Racing
  • 7.6
    5K/10K Racing

  • Performance Usages

  • 6.3
    Energy Return
  • 4.6
    Cushioning
  • 8.6
    Lateral Stability
  • Changelog

    1.  Updated Nov 13, 2025: Review published.
    2.  Updated Nov 11, 2025: Early access published.

    Popular Running Shoe Comparisons

    Topo Phantom 4

    The Topo Cyclone 3 and Topo Phantom 4 are two of the more established shoes in the relatively new brand's lineup. Both have Topo's distinctive wide toe box, and the same advertised 5mm heel-to-toe drop. But the Cyclone sits much lower to the ground, with 10mm less stack height under the heel. As such, the Cyclone is a nimbler, lighter, but noticeably less cushioned shoe that's good for shorter, faster workouts, while the Phantom provides better protection and has a bit more range.

    How We Test Running Shoes
    How We Test Running Shoes

    We've recently started buying and testing running shoes with a very data-oriented approach. While we're just getting started, our methodology already has dozens of tests to help you make the right purchasing decision for your needs. Not only do we use high-end equipment to gather objective data, but we also order multiple sizes of the same shoes for team members to be able to log in miles. This real-world testing is done at various paces and conditions, and with different types of workouts, to cover all the bases. This allows us to verify our results and ensure they align with what you might feel with a specific pair.

    Test Results

    perceptual testing image
    Sort:
    RATINGS
    Category:
    All
    Design
    8.4
    Weight
    Weight
    193.4 g (6.82 oz)
    Stack Heights
    Heel Stack Height
    27.2 mm
    Forefoot Stack Height
    22.4 mm
    Heel-To-Toe Drop
    4.8 mm
    Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
    5.0 mm
    External Shape
    Outsole Heel Width
    86 mm (3.4")
    Outsole Arch Width
    73 mm (2.9")
    Outsole Forefoot Width
    111 mm (4.4")
    Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio
    3.16
    Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio
    4.96
    Internal Shape
    Internal Length
    277 mm (10.9")
    Internal Heel Width
    67 mm (2.6")
    Internal Forefoot Width
    98 mm (3.9")
    Wide Sizing Available
    Yes
    Other Features
    Tongue Gusset Type
    Non-gusseted
    Plate
    None
    Performance
    5.7
    Heel Energy Return
    See details on graph tool
    Heel Energy Return
    73.0%
    6.6
    Forefoot Energy Return
    See details on graph tool
    Forefoot Energy Return
    74.9%
    4.5
    Heel Cushioning
    See details on graph tool
    Energy Absorbed At 550N
    2.53 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1100N
    6.32 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1900N
    10.24 J
    4.6
    Forefoot Cushioning
    See details on graph tool
    Energy Absorbed At 800N
    2.86 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1300N
    5.08 J
    Energy Absorbed At 2050N
    7.51 J
    8.0
    Heel Firmness
    See details on graph tool
    Firmness At 550N
    75.1 N/mm
    Firmness At 1100N
    181.3 N/mm
    Firmness At 1900N
    423.0 N/mm
    9.3
    Forefoot Firmness
    See details on graph tool
    Firmness At 800N
    168.2 N/mm
    Firmness At 1300N
    331.1 N/mm
    Firmness At 2050N
    666.7 N/mm