Amazon.com: 25% or more off clearance running shoes - click here to view current selection.
Running Warehouse: HOKA SALE! - Up to 50% select models through 10/31 (view selection).

Nike Free 3.0 in Stock at Footlocker.com

I’ve written several posts about how much I like the Nike Free 3.0 – it’s still one of my all-time favorite running shoes. The problem is that the model is pretty hard to come by these days, leading some (myself included) to speculate that the model might be going away. Just noticed that Foot Locker now has the Free 3.0 in stock in several different color combinations, so it seems to survive at least for now.

Click on the image below to check out the Nike Free 3.0 at Footlocker.com:

Nike Free 3.0 color combos available at Footlocker.com

You can also get free shipping by clicking on the banner below and searching for “Nike Free 3.0.”

Footlocker.com

Alternatively, you can also purchase the Nike Free 3.0 at Eastbay using the following banner coupon for $15 off. Just click and search for “Nike Free 3.0.” Not sure which of these options is the better deal.

Eastbay.com

Running Warehouse: Great prices on closeout shoes! View men's and women's selections.
Amazon.com: 25% or more off clearance running shoes - click here to view current selection.
Trivllage: Save 18% on run, swim, and cycle gear. Use Code: RBTri18.

Recent Posts By Category: Running Shoe Reviews | Running Gear Reviews | Running Science

About Peter Larson

This post was authored by Peter Larson. Pete is a recovering academic who currently works as an exercise physiologist, running coach, and writer. He's also a father of three and a fanatical runner with a bit of a shoe obsession. In addition to writing and editing this site, he is co-author of the book Tread Lightly, and writes a personal blog called The Blogologist. Follow Pete on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, and via email.

Comments

  1. Chelsealopez78 says:

    I’m glad the NIke Free 3.0s are back! I bought a black pair myself just recently and the feel is just so comfortable – especially when I go to the gym on weekdays.

  2. Chris K says:

    The 3.0s (mens and womens) are available again at Nike.com as well.

  3. Patrick says:

    wow. thats awesome. I tried the original 3.0 out a few years ago. It had this hard plastic thing in the ankle region that i think was part of the sowing or something to keep the shoe together. it dug in my ankle so bad, i had to return them. I think this may have been why the 3.0 almost vanished. Glad to see V2 has come back. And they fixed the heel! I’ve been iffy on buying nike’s since though. They insisted it wasn’t a design flaw to put hard plastic right under the ankle bone and simply told me my foot was the problem. They refused refund but eventually gave in to exchanging it for 5.0 V4.

    • Pete Larson says:

      Patrick,

      I still wear my original Free 3.0′s and haven’t noticed the plastic
      piece that you’re referring to – wonder if it was just a bad shoe? The
      upper on mine is completely fabric, and I acutually like it better
      than the v2 Free 3.0.

      Pete

  4. Pete

    Unfortunately the Nike 3.0 is unavailable anywhere in the UK now.

    What show would you rate, from your experience, as coming closest to it? I’m not ready for Vibram but the 3.0 sounds from your many posts like the ideal gateway shoe to minimalist running.

  5. I wish I could wear the Nike brand, but it won’t fit my foot right. These syles look really good though. You can get free shipping with Foot Locker couponsonline which is a good way to get them if you already know they work for you and don’t need to try them on.

  6. Gregoryjohnwhite says:

    Question: I’ve heard that the 3.0 v2s have a bit more arch support. True? Seems like it might be a bit of an issue.

    • Pete Larson says:

      Maybe a tiny bit more, but it’s hard to say for sure. You comment is
      the first time I heard that, so it wasn’t enough of a difference for
      me to notice while wearing them.

      Pete

      • I’ve used the 3.0′s and I have to agree. Aside from a small amount of arch support, it is not flat and still has a cushioned heel (even if it’s a little less than other shoes). It’s also ridiculously narrow. In no way does it replicate running barefoot. If your foot can fit into them, they’re definitely comfortable but don’t be fooled into thinking that they’re giving you all the benefits of running barefoot. If your looking for footwear that will protect your feet but allow you to remain as close to “barefoot” as possible, this is not the shoe. For me, I’ve learned that the important things to look for are : Zero heel/forefoot differential, no arch support, wide forefoot to allow toes to spread naturally, minimal/no cushioning. Two that I’ve found that come closest to this are Vibram Five Fingers (that I use for running), and Terra Plan VivoBarefoot – Aquas (that I use for everyday use). I’m sure this may not be for everybody but I must say, unless they come out with something close to this, I don’t think I will ever wear a sneaker again!
        If you’re into the “minimalist” footwear thing, then I’m guessing your probably at that point because you believe that our feet are meant to be used closer to or in their natural state. Why should we do it half-way then. If we believe that our foot was meant to be used as it is designed (and I do) then we should “protect” our feet, not “correct” our feet.
        Sorry for rambling on. I’m just one of those people that have wasted way to much money on sneakers as I learned how and why our feet were designed to function “as they are”.

        • Pete Larson says:

          It’s definitely not barefoot, but is an improvement over most shoes on the
          market. There are a lot of people who will likely never try barefoot
          running, so for that group this might be a reasonable alternative. I did a
          run the other day where I started barefoot and then switched into the Free
          3.0′s after 2 miles, and you’re correct that they are no proxy, but at least
          a step in the right direction.

          Pete

          • I do agree that it is a step in the right direction. And that’s a good thing. The problem I have is that they are marketed by Nike as a “barefoot” shoe that give you all the benefit of being barefoot, when in reality this is far from true. Yes, it is less of a shoe than most out there. Extremely light, incredibly flexible, etc., but the cushion, slightly raised heel, small amount of support under the arch, crammed toebox, make it impossible to use your foot/ankle/calves as you would when running barefoot or even in VFF’s. Then again, they are “3.0′s” on a scale of 0-10. So, I guess I would love for Nike to come out with a 1.0 or 0.0. Something more like the Terra Plana vivo barefoot “Evo’s” but not looking like it belongs in an episode of star trek! (I think the evo’s are the most ridiculous looking shoes I’ve ever seen! and that’s coming from someone who wears Vibram Five Fingers!).
            :-/

          • Pete Larson says:

            Todd,

            I agree 100%! I made that argument when the Free Run+ came out and was
            criticized by several for being critical without ever wearing the
            shoe. Sometimes it’s just plain obvious when a marketing machine is at
            work :)

            Pete

Speak Your Mind

*