New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Trainer v3 vs FuelCell SuperComp Elite v5
Which Running Shoe Is Better?
Products
Tested using Methodology v0.10
Updated Mar 09, 2026 03:09 PM
SEE PRICE
Amazon.com
Tested using Methodology v0.11
Updated Apr 10, 2026 07:09 PM
SEE PRICE
Amazon.com
Weight
266.0 g (9.38 oz)
Heel-To-Toe Drop
8.3 mm
Plate
Carbon Fiber
Weight
200.5 g (7.07 oz)
Heel-To-Toe Drop
8.9 mm
Plate
Carbon Fiber
Our Verdict
New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Trainer v3
New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v5
The New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Trainer v3 and the New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v5 are marketed as companion shoes, with the Elite v5 being for races, and the Trainer v3 being, as the name suggests, a shoe for training runs leading up to race day. As befits a racing shoe, the Elite v5 has a more aggressive rocker, much better energy return, and is over 60 g lighter than the Trainer v3. The main advantage of the Trainer v3 is its superior lateral stability, anchored by a wider outsole platform that provides a more solid base than the streamlined Elite v5.
Variants
- FuelCell SuperComp Trainer v3 (Angora/Hot Mango/Black - (Men - US 9))
- FuelCell SuperComp Trainer v3 (Angora/Hot Mango/Black - (Women - US 7))
- FuelCell SuperComp Elite v5 (Urgent Red/White/Black - (Men - US 9))
- FuelCell SuperComp Elite v5 (Urgent Red/White/Black - (Women - US 7))
Main Differences for
Marathon Racing
Marathon Racing
Threshold
Marathon Racing
7.1
8.4
Forefoot Energy Return
5.2
8.6
Weight
5.8
8.1
Heel Energy Return
4.4
8.6
Outsole Arch Width
83 mm (3.3")
55 mm (2.2")
Full Comparison
Design
Weight
5.8
8.1
Right Shoe Weight Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Left Shoe Weight Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Weight
266.0 g (9.38 oz)
200.5 g (7.07 oz)
Stack Heights
Stack Height Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Stack Height
38.4 mm
39.4 mm
Forefoot Stack Height
30.1 mm
30.5 mm
Heel-To-Toe Drop
8.3 mm
8.9 mm
Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
6.0 mm
8.0 mm
External Shape
3D Model Full Shoe
Preview 3D
Preview 3D
Outsole Heel Width
89 mm (3.5")
75 mm (3.0")
Outsole Arch Width
83 mm (3.3")
55 mm (2.2")
Outsole Forefoot Width
118 mm (4.7")
106 mm (4.2")
Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio
2.32
1.90
Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio
3.92
3.48
Internal Shape
3D Model Internal
Preview 3D
Preview 3D
Internal Length
277 mm (10.9")
276 mm (10.9")
Internal Heel Width
63 mm (2.5")
64 mm (2.5")
Internal Forefoot Width
90 mm (3.5")
90 mm (3.5")
Wide Sizing Available
Yes
Yes
Forefoot Fit: Width
9.7
9.2
Forefoot Width Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Ball-Of-Foot TTS Deviation
1.6 mm (0.065")
-1.2 mm (-0.045")
Toe TTS Deviation
-0.4 mm (-0.015")
-2.7 mm (-0.105")
Forefoot Fit: Height
5.9
8.5
Forefoot Height Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Toe TTS Deviation
-4.9 mm (-0.194")
-2.1 mm (-0.081")
Arch Fit: Width
6.6
5.4
Arch Fit Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Arch Width TTS Deviation
-5.1 mm (-0.201")
-6.5 mm (-0.256")
Length Fit
10
10
Toe Clearance Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Rocker Geometry
9.5
Heel Rocker Photo
Heel Spring
50 mm (2.0")
Heel Apex Position
63.5%
Heel Rocker Angle
27.2°
Forefoot Rocker Geometry
7.7
Forefoot Rocker Photo
Toe Spring
54 mm (2.1")
Toe Apex Position
63.5%
Forefoot Rocker Angle
27.2°
Other Features
Other Features Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Tongue Gusset Type
Semi-gusseted
Semi-gusseted
Plate
Carbon Fiber
Carbon Fiber
Performance
Heel Compression Energy Return
4.4
8.6
Heel Compression Video
Heel Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Heel Energy Return
71.1%
84.8%
Forefoot Compression Energy Return
5.2
8.6
Forefoot Compression Video
Forefoot Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Forefoot Energy Return
72.2%
84.6%
Heel Cushioning
7.3
7.2
Heel Cushioning Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 550N
3.20 J
3.89 J
Energy Absorbed At 1100N
8.98 J
8.66 J
Energy Absorbed At 1900N
15.63 J
13.82 J
Forefoot Cushioning
7.3
7.9
Forefoot Cushioning Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Forefoot Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 800N
4.31 J
5.08 J
Energy Absorbed At 1300N
7.82 J
8.46 J
Energy Absorbed At 2050N
11.81 J
12.15 J
Heel Firmness
5.8
6.9
Heel Firmness
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Firmness At 550N
56.6 N/mm
58.9 N/mm
Firmness At 1100N
108.4 N/mm
143.4 N/mm
Firmness At 1900N
254.8 N/mm
328.3 N/mm
Forefoot Firmness
7.9
8.1
Forefoot Firmness
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Firmness At 800N
103.8 N/mm
103.6 N/mm
Firmness At 1300N
209.4 N/mm
223.0 N/mm
Firmness At 2050N
388.0 N/mm
445.3 N/mm
Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
6.5
7.2
Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 10km
7.08 J
7.78 J
Energy Absorbed At 20km
6.92 J
7.65 J
Energy Absorbed At 30km
6.80 J
7.56 J
Energy Absorbed At 40km
6.70 J
7.49 J
Rocker Stiffness
7.8
Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Video
Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Graph
Preview Graph
Force To Flatten The Rocker
110 N
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
8.6
Forefoot Bending Video
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
Preview Graph
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
76.3%
Forefoot Bending Stiffness
7.9
Forefoot Bending Resistance Picture
Forefoot Bending Resistance
Preview Graph
Forefoot Bending Stiffness
19.9 N/mm
Forefoot Bending Force
290 N
To access
Become a member
unlimited full product reviews,
product prices, and
other exclusive site features
New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Trainer v3
New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v5
Comments
New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Trainer v3 vs New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v5: Main Discussion
What do you think of these products? Let us know below.
Looking for a personalized buying advice from the RTINGS.com experts? Members have direct access to buying advice on our member forum.