Wednesday, January 13, 2021

Brooks Glycerin 19 and Glycerin GTS 19 Multi Tester Review

Article by Jeff Beck, Ryan Eiler and Michael Elenberger

Brooks Glycerin 19 ($150) and Glycerin GTS 19 ($150)


Michael: We’ll get the basics out of the way - Brooks has finally consolidated some of its models, such that the “Transcend” is now under the “Glycerin” umbrella, with the “GTS” moniker (“Go-To-Stability”) denoting stability through the GuideRails system. I’m a fan of this move, generally - fewer options alleviates some consumer confusion, and allows Brooks to fine-tune models more specifically. 

Women’s Glycerin 19 

Fortunately for Brooks and you, dear reader, the Glycerin and sister shoe Glycerin GTS are two handsome, well-done, and enjoyable trainers. Perfect they are not, but the pair from Seattle are trainers that should appeal to a pretty broad scope of runners - cushioned enough to appease the high-cushion wearers (the traditional Glycerin crowd), but just nimble enough to tear away some Ghost fanatics who want a trainer that can drop down in pace. It’s not the smoothest running up-tempo trainer, but it still has sufficient range to appease a lot of runners!

Jeff: I only reviewed the standard, non-stability (GTS) model, but this is my ninth or tenth Glycerin I’ve run in and my fourth Glycerin review (16, 17, 18, 19) and I see the Glycerin as kind of a birthday for me at RTR - the G16 was my first review for the site. That said, leading up to the 19 we’ve seen a lot of minor iterations as the shoe has been trending in the right direction, just doing it very slowly. Each year the upper gets a little better, the midsole gets a little more DNA Loft, and the shoe loses just a little bit of weight. That remains true this year, except this shoe feels like it got three or four iterations from last year’s shoe. A couple years ago I said the G17 should have been called the 16.5 it was so close to the previous shoe, if you told me this was actually the Glycerin 23 it wouldn’t shock me: that’s how much forward progress this year’s model made. 

I haven’t seen official stats for stack height or weight, but apples to apples with the same size Glycerin 18, the 19 is down 15g / 0.6 oz and it is clear that this shoe has a much more robust midsole - both in stack height and platform width. It feels like this is the first Glycerin in a while that Brooks really leaned into and said they really wanted to make a nicely cushioned trainer. Will it be too much though? Spoiler alert - not for me.

Ryan: In contrast to the hundreds of miles Jeff has ridden in the Glycerin saddle, I’ll be sharing my perspective as a first-time wearer of this daily trainer evolved from the many generations before it. I strongly second Michael’s appreciation of Brooks’s lineup consolidation, as there’s no excuse for marketing ambiguity with so many brands making so many impressive shoes these days. The Glycerin’s $150 price point caught my eye, being that it’s slightly above where you see most similarly-marketed trainers marked these days, putting it in the premium plush category of such trainers.


Estimated Weighst 

Glycerin 19: men's 10.16 oz / 288g (US9)  women's 8.7 oz / 247g (US8)

Glycerin GTS 19: men's 10.6 oz / 300g (US9) women's 9.5 oz / 269g

G19 sample weights: 

men’s 10.7 oz / 303g (US10.5), 10.3 oz / 292g (US9.5), 9.94 oz / 282g (US8.5)

women's 8.89 oz /252g (US8.5)

GTS19 sample: 10.4 oz / 295g (US8.5)

Offset: 10mm drop

Available Feb 2021. $150


Michael: Top-end fit and finish (both); smooth ride without much clunk (both); classic Ghost DNA permeates down (both); stability that stays out of your way (GTS)

Jeff/Ryan: Midsole is a massive improvement, with exceptional cushioning in the heel and forefoot - and doesn’t just feel like a slab of foam.

Jeff: Breathable upper with a decent toe box.

Jeff: Outsole allows enough flex to make the shoe run very smoothly.

Ryan: Excellent blend of materials and construction for its intended use.


Michael: Heel collar and rear third of shoe are a bit stiff (both); middling up-tempo prowess (both).

Jeff/Ryan: 40 miles in I’m already seeing wear in the exposed midsole at the lateral midsole, right where I land - a small piece of rubber would give quite a bit more durability for midfoot landing supinators (there has to be at least one other one in the world).

Ryan: Ride transition is abrupt from heel to toe given hourglass midsole geometry.

Left: Glycerin 19 Right: Glycerin GTS 19

Tester Profiles

Jeff is the token slow runner of the RTR lineup as such his viewpoints on shoe and gear can differ from those who routinely finish marathons in three hours or less. Jeff runs 40 miles per week, both roads and desert trails in Phoenix, Arizona. He has a PR's of 4:07 marathon and 5K at 23:39. In December 2019 he raced his first 50 mile trail ultra. 

Ryan Eller A hopeless soccer career led Ryan to take up running, and after taking a decade-long break from competing, he is back racking up mileage whenever he can.  He calls the 2018 Boston Marathon the hardest race of his life, where he finished in 2:40, barely remembering his name at the finish line.  More recently he has solo time trialed the 2020 super shoes, often sub 15 minutes for 5K.

Michael is a 2019 graduate of Northwestern University Law School in Chicago, with an interest in patent and intellectual property law. Prior to law school, he competed collegiately at Washington University in St. Louis (10,000m PR of 30:21). He recently finished 2nd at the Chicago Half-Marathon in a PR of 67:43, and was the top Illinois finisher in the 2017 Boston Marathon (2:33:03, 82nd overall). He recently secured a 2:31 marathon PR at the Austin Marathon. 

First Impressions and Fit

Jeff: At first glance, I thought this was just another Glycerin. And that’s not a bad thing, but for the last couple years it’s been a boring thing. Very well cushioned daily trainers, ideal as a daily trainer for bigger/slower runners or long/easy/recovery miles for lighter/faster runners, rarely move the mercury when it comes to excitement. But as soon as I put my foot in, I could tell Brooks had done some very subtle work on this shoe, making it just a little wider and higher, while carving a solid half ounce of weight off of the shoe. As Brooks adds more DNA Loft midsole material to the shoe, it really seems to improve it - and this is the most exciting change to the line, perhaps ever. Fitwise it is spot on true-to-size, and I find the toebox width and height to be very good 

Ryan: While nobody is going to throw a parade for the looks or personality of this shoe, it feels exceptionally inviting to lace up and step into. The squishy DNA Loft underfoot immediately drops a hint that these are ready for many, many fairly casual miles. It’s clear that comfort is the focus of the upper, given how willing it is to accommodate your foot’s shape. 

I immediately noticed the bulging foam around the forefoot and heel, which left no doubt that this was going to be a stable ride. 

Fit around all parts of my foot was very pleasant, and my M9.5 (US) was spot-on to size.

Michael: My first impression was - isn’t this the Ghost? I don’t have a ton of experience in the Glycerin line, but all of my past instances have involved bulkier, less svelte trainers. The Glycerin 19 (and its near identical GTS counterpart) are handsome (if traditional) trainers. 

The heel collar stood out to me - it’s large and puffy - and the over-cushioned midsole. A welcome sight for sore legs.   


Jeff: The Glycerin 19 upper is a subtle update, continuing Brooks’ combination of a multi-layer mesh and 3D Fit Print to give the shoe some structure in the way of overlays. The interior of the shoe is incredibly plush, wrapping the foot with soft materials. The gusseted tongue is not going anywhere, and isn’t overly cushioned, but you aren’t likely to feel much lace bite. 

The upper has some stretch around the toebox, giving your toes plenty of room to splay out - even Altra/Topo devotees might fight enough space up front. It’s been pretty cold, so I can’t speak with experience if they will work well in hot weather, but a few of my runs were on the treadmill and I didn’t have any heat related complaints. 

Lastly, the heel counter is very thick and built up, nearly identical to last year’s model, but I didn’t have any issues with them. If they had added a pull tab of some sort I wouldn’t be upset, but the shoe opens up well to allow your foot in even without the assist.

Ryan: Visually, it’s a clean, safe design which you’d expect from a Brooks trainer. The material from the gusseted tongue reaches all the way forward, completely engulfing the toe box and providing a secondary layer of mesh around the front half of the foot. 

It ups the coziness factor and nearly feels as if you’re wearing an (thin) extra sock. While this might retain some additional heat and moisture, I don’t mind it for running in the Boston climate. I’d rate the lockdown as medium-low, given the plush materials, accommodating toe box, and vent holes over the toe which willingly stretch. 

The heel counter is rock solid, and the padding in the collar and tongue is adequate but not excessive. 

It fit me perfectly true to size, and has an accommodating toe box for those with width concerns.

Michael: The uppers are identical across standard and GTS and both have a gusset tongue whereas the Launch 8 had none and Launch GTS 8 had one/  I’d echo all my fellow reviewers have said regarding the comfort and sizing. I put more miles on the standard (50) than the GTS (20), but in both cases, I did have a slightly discomfort at my achilles when breaking in the shoe - the heel collar, padded as it is, has some firm plastic insert right down the median - but that subsided after a run or two.


Jeff: Another year, another note of “more DNA Loft”, but this year it’s something special. At first glance it appears to be a very slight change from last year, but lining them up (and breaking out some calipers) it becomes very clear that the G19 midsole has much more of a foot-shaped contour, as well as getting wider and taller.

Top: Glycerin 19      Bottom: Glycerin 18

The forefoot is about 7mm wider, while the midfoot is about 2mm narrower, and the heel is about 7mm wider. The overall wider platform is very noticeable even when just standing, as you put more weight on the forefoot you can see and feel the sides slightly caving in to give the shoe a little more squish. However, out on the roads it just feels a little softer. It isn’t clear where the extra DNA Loft went, unless they mean an overall slightly higher and wider midsole. 

The stack height seems to have grown, especially in the forefoot. Interestingly enough, the heel stack seems to be overall very close, but the midsole volume has gone up quite a bit in the heel.

I think the volume increase is the main reason that the midsole of the G19 feels a little different than the G18. When pressing into the heel with my thumb there is noticeably more give to the newer model. Without dissecting both shoes it’s hard to say with certainty if we’re dealing with a different midsole formula, or if the extra volume leads to a little more give. Either way, they took a very solid midsole and made it much, much better. How they got there isn’t nearly as important to me.

Ryan: Likewise to Jeff’s thoughts, the accentuated hourglass shape of the midsole was very noticeable to me. From the point-of-runner view, you look down to witness DNA Loft bulging out on either side of your forefoot and heel.

It gives the Glycerin a heavily cushioned feel, as intended, with a mellow personality that’s great for racking up long, steady mileage -- if you’re looking for a chunk of Adderall-laced ‘trampoline effect’ foam, look elsewhere. I found the compression and rebound rates of the midsole to be highly predictable and easy to get used to. DNA Loft is a smart choice for battling asphalt and allowing one to healthily squeeze in a few extra training miles.

Michael: In terms of midsole, the standard and GTS variant Glycerin and markedly similar - packed with DNA Loft from edge to edge. It’s nice stuff, and I don’t think many runners - even though used to a highly cushioned trainer - will be at want for more foam here.

Top: Glycerin 19 GTS Bottom: Glycerin 19

The GuideRails are the new element to the Glycerin lineup (GTS only, of course) and I’m happy to report… well, mostly nothing. We have a co molded somewhat firmer rail on the medial side and raised side walls on the lateral side of the GTS.

As I’ll discuss in the Ride section below, while there is some added medial guidance focused more on stabilizing the knee and keeping the runner on their "natural motion path" than classic pronation control, as is especially noticed at slower paces (as I determined  in my Sam-Winebaum-classic A/B Test). The overall feel of the GTS and standard Glycerins are very, very similar. They’re soft without being mushy, and they’re quite comfortable. 


Jeff: Brooks didn’t reinvent the wheel with the Glycerin 19 outsole, sticking with a blown rubber segmented outsole with a little bit of exposed midsole. There are a few grooves between and within the rubber, allowing the shoe to flex. Durability and traction are both solid for the rubber, I have more than 40 miles on my pair and I can still see a lot of the outsole texture, with only a few spots having worn a slightly smooth. I had a few runs following inclement weather, and didn’t have any issues with slipping or sliding. 

My only gripe is the exposed midsole around the midfoot on the lateral side. It is already recessed a little from the surrounding rubber, and I could see over the span of 250-300 miles it wearing down further, making for a potentially stilted ride. This could be a very specific issue, since most runners don’t land midfoot or supinate, and I do both. If you do neither, you have nothing to worry about.

Ryan: Jeff covered the fundamentals nicely, and I’ve had a very similar experience to his in this shoe after about 80 miles. However, I’ll definitely reiterate his concern about the void of rubber in the midfoot on the lateral side. While the design is similar to the verison 18, it looks like Brooks simply carved away a larger patch of rubber for weight savings. I’m not sure why they’ve chosen to take rubber from this particular spot, but it’s likely to be a point of weakness for its durability. In my case, my fairly neutral stride tends to do some wearing right where the rubber meets the exposed foam. That small issue aside, the blown rubber feels great on any surface and is likely to outlast the midsole.

Michael: Fundamentals, indeed - the Glycerin 19 outsole is just a standard, blown-rubber affair, punctuated by the occasional flex groove. To its credit, I actually found the Glycerin to be a more dynamic and flexible ride than I would have expected, especially looking across the bottom. Unlike Jeff, I didn’t experience any premature wear in my pair(s), though I did notice a slight hot spot on the lateral-most metatarsal - the upper isn’t tight there, so I’m thinking it’s just a little extra friction from the thick midsole and firm outsole. Not a problem, long-term - I would expect this shoe to last a very, very long time, outsole-wise.


Jeff: Smooth with some squish, just like a big mileage trainer should be. The Glycerin 19 has a very smooth and well cushioned ride, ideal for keeping your feet and legs fresh on a long run or the day after speedwork. They don’t have a great snap at toe off like many faster shoes do, but this wouldn’t be the shoe I’d recommend for any uptempo efforts. 

Ryan: This is a fairly conventional, cushion-focused workhorse, albeit with a more hourglass-shaped midsole than most. As a result, the ride isn’t quite as seamless from heel to toe. The wide platforms at the heel and forefoot relative to the slim ‘waist’ give the transition somewhat of an abrupt feel. When rolling forward from heel to toe, you’re hopped from one island of foam to the next (this isn’t as dramatic as it sounds, but conveys the general sensation of the midfoot being overpowered by the toe and heel). I noticed the same type of sensation in Brooks’s high-end Hyperion Elite 2 racer, given its same flared out toe and heel, but the sensation felt more appropriate there given its use case, as well as its softer midsole foam.

On the positive side, there is plentiful stability when you need it most -- as you begin your stride, and as you complete it. My griping aside, the Glycerin still manages to deliver a highly protective and comforting ride that can absolutely be trusted for heavy mileage. I plan on using these for easier recovery days when I know I’ll be running on asphalt the entire way.

Michael: Briefly, I’ll give category-wide feedback (standard and GTS) and say that the ride was considerably less clunky than I expected (especially, as noted above, in view of the outsole). While I had issues with the shoe at faster paces, it’s really never a stodgy ride - meaning, even when the trainer isn’t necessarily working for you, it doesn’t feel as if it’s working against you.

All of the above applies to the standard (non-GTS) Glycerin, of course, and as stated, I was pretty pleased with the midsole ride. Unlike Ryan, I did feel that there was a fairly seamless contact-to-toe-off, though, as Jeff stated, there just isn’t any snap or pop at faster paces. 

For the stability (GTS) model, it’s… pretty much the same. There is a firmer medial edge, especially noticeable at slower clips when I can tell I’m pronating, but it’s hardly the same presence as, say, a mid-2000s era stability shoe, where you felt that high-density foam with every step. Not the highest praise, I know. But! even in comparison to some of Brooks’s more recent models, I found the midsole to sort of swallow up the sensation of stability - the cushioning is so strong, and the platform so wide, that I had a hard time telling the standard and GTS models apart in my A/B run. I’m willing to concede that the GuideRails are functional - in the end, I could tell the difference between GTS and not - but it’s a subtle, more homogenous sensation. Pleasant and easy-riding.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Jeff: Brooks steps it up, making this big mileage daily trainer among the more cushioned options while bringing the weight down. One of those shoes that gets almost nothing wrong, the wider and softer midsole steals the show, making the 19th Glycerin easily the best of its name. The last few years we’ve seen the Saucony Triumph and New Balance 1080 improve and iterate, the Glycerin was due - and it delivered. Well done Brooks.

Jeff’s Score 9.4 out of 10

Ride: 9 (50%) Fit: 10 (30%) Value: 10 (15%) Style: 8 (5%)

Ryan: The Glycerin doesn’t pack any major surprises, but rather focuses on doing the right things in the right way. They’ve chosen quality materials and served them up in the right amounts to create a very friendly shoe. There’s plush comfort from generous amounts of mesh and padding in the upper, stability from a wide, healthy dose of DNA Loft midsole foam, and durability from thick and plentiful rubber underfoot. My only qualms are with the width of its heel and forefoot foam relative to the midfoot, as well as some weight-saving choices they made in scrapping some outsole rubber. If you’re a Brooks buff, you won’t be disappointed with this latest version of its flagship cushioned trainer.

Ryan’s Score: 8.5 out of 10

Detractions for ride transition, outsole design, and price point. 

Michael: I’m just going to score the standard and GTS models together here, and summarise them as one. In short, they’re both… fine. Fine, in a couple different meanings - they’re “fine,” in the flat, monotonous the way a middle schooler describes their day to a parent, but they’re also “fine” as a fine wine or silk suit - they’re honed, tuned. Those two terms may seem antithetical, but I’m not so sure - the Glycerin is imperfect, yes, even frustrating in that heel, but the ride really is smooth, and the cushion adequate. The shoe is well-constructed, comfortable, soft, supportive… and fine. 

Michael’s Score: 8.5/10.  


Index to all RTR reviews: HERE

Brooks Glycerin 18  

Jeff: Similar formula of not getting much wrong, the 18 just didn’t bring much excitement to the table. The 19’s midsole is wider, taller, and softer, and the result is a markedly better shoe. This is one of those cases to save up and spend a little more on the newer model, it is very much worth the difference.

ASICS Gel Nimbus 23  (RTR Review)

Jeff: An impressive update for ASICS big mileage trainer, in a head-to-head (or foot-to-foot) matchup the Nimbus feels heavy and dense. The uppers have a similar quality, with the Glycerin fitting a little better, but the midsole is the all the difference with the Gel making the shoe feel bottom heavy and not nearly the same level of plush comfort. No hesitation, Glycerin wins.

ASICS Novablast  (RTR Review)

Jeff: Another impressive ASICS, the Novablast has tons of cushioning, an interesting design geometry, and a comfortable, if slightly loose fitting, upper. It also has some major stability issues, giving it a fatal flaw, while the Glycerin’s flaws are minor, if any. The Novablast is a little better suited for faster running, but the Glycerin takes the cake for more varied use.

Ryan: The Novablast has garnered quite a following due in part to its high ‘fun factor’, and emits a much more hyped-up vibe than the Glycerin. The ASICS’s foam is without question more lively, to the detriment of stability. Both rely on gobs of soft foam for maximal protection, but stark differences in geometry result in very different ride characteristics. Whereas the Novablast is bouncy and propulsive, the Glycerin is far more stable and well behaved. If the Novablast are tartan trousers, the Glycerin are a pair of pleated khakis.

Michael: Ryan’s nailed it. The Novablast is a far more fun and engaging shoe than the Glycerin, but they aren't really competing (despite their presence in similar daily training categories). For all the bouncy, squishy, untamed fun of the Novablast, the Glycerin is controlled, disciplined… boring. Boring works - and runners who want a more even, balanced ride may like the Brooks . But the Novablast is undoubtedly a more fun trainer. 

adidas Ultraboost 20   (RTR Review)

Jeff: The Ultraboost finds itself in the position that the Glycerin has been in for a couple years - it isn’t a bad shoe but it doesn’t do much to wow anybody. Boost continues to show its age as other midsole materials continue to impress, but the UB20 knit upper does boast a lot of comfort. Ultimately, there’s no comparison, the Glycerin 19 is a massive step up.

Mizuno Wave Sky Neo  (RTR Review)

Jeff: My shoe of the year for 2020, these shoes run very similarly with the on-paper differences looming larger than the performance. The Brooks weighs two ounces less, costs quite a bit less, and will be easily available - which means it should be the easiest comparison on this list. But I’m still enamored with how well the Neo runs, and especially how good I feel post run. That said, if you already have a pair of the Mizunos, you probably don’t need to run out and grab the best Brooks trainer in a decade. If you are weighing the pros and cons between the two - ask yourself if you want to spend $30-50 more (depending on exchange rates) to import a pair of shoes or just place an order just about anywhere? It’s an easy choice, get the Glycerin (and yes, that pains me a little to write).

New Balance 1080v11  (RTR Review)

Jeff: New Balance’s answer for the big mileage trainer, this is the second year their model rocks their Fresh Foam X midsole, mated to a comfortable upper. Personally I slightly prefer the ride of the Brooks, but the bigger issue for me is the heel failure of the 1080. More annoying than the 19th verse of Baby Shark, I found the heel just ends too quickly causing constant pressure on the back of both heels in the v11, taking a shoe that should be comfortable for double digit miles, and in every run I was ready to be done before the end of the second mile. If the back of your heel is super flat, the v11 is probably the shoe you’ve been waiting for, but if your heel has a curve at the back, get the Glycerin and don’t look back.

Michael: I’ll disagree with Jeff. Where I think the new 1080 really succeeds is in its dynamism - it can go slow, it can go fast. Not what you’d expect from a flagship, high-mileage trainer. Meanwhile, the Glycerin is a bit more one-note and one-speed. Brooks diehards won’t be disappointed by the G19, but I like the New Balance. 

Nike React Infinity  (RTR Review)

Jeff: This was the first shoe I thought of when I put the Glycerin 19 one - they have a similar midsole profile, especially around the forefoot. The wide platform was nice in both cases, though elsewhere the shoes diverged. The stability heel clip in the Nike caused some issues with many runners’ arches, and heel slip was a constant problem, made worse by the lack of second top eyelet. I added a pair of extra eyelets with a leather punch, which cleared up the heel slip problems, but the constant arch pressure (and pretty good, but not amazing, ride) makes it easy to favor the Glycerin here.

Saucony Endorphin Shift  (RTR Review)

Jeff: One of the few shoes with a higher stack than the Glycerin, the trainer option of the Endorphin line isn’t quite as plush or comfortable than the Glycerin in any way - but is every bit as versatile as the Brooks, with better performance as speed picks up. The Saucony has a more aggressive geometry, while the Brooks feels better. It’s a comparison I’ve made a few times, but it’s a personal preference we’ve seen with luxury sport cars. Do you favor sport luxury (Saucony) or luxury sport (Brooks) - in either case, congratulations. You’ve got an awesome shoe.

Michael: I won’t mince words here - the Endorphin Shift is my favorite high-cushion trainer of 2020, and probably ever, and I’d rather run slow or fast in it over the Glycerin.

Saucony Triumph 18  (RTR Review)

Jeff: Saucony refined the impressive Triumph 17 (my favorite shoe of 2019) and the result was kind of disappointing for me. Lighter and better, it just didn’t run quite as smoothly as its predecessor. In an A/B matchup between the T18 and G19, I was surprised how disappointing Saucony’s PWRRUN+ felt, speaking volumes of Brooks’ latest DNA Loft offering. The Saucony has a denser feel, but a similar platform shape, giving a little extra room around the ball of the foot. I still enjoy the T18, but the G19 easily edges it out as one of my top three go-to trainers.

Hoka Mach 4 (RTR Review)

Ryan: The Mach 4 was my favorite trainer of 2020, so the Brooks has a tough fight here. I’ll start where they’re similar: both shoes stand out for the deep, pillowy protection they provide, as well as for how stable and well-behaved their midsoles act. And with both offering sublimely comfortable, fairly plush uppers, either would serve you well as a daily, high mileage trainer. Where the Hoka stands out is with regard to the ride that it provides and its considerably lighter weight, 2 oz lighter. 

The transition from heel to toe in stride is far smoother and more refined (I kept using the word “buttery” in my Mach 4 review). Hoka also paired the Mach 4’s foam midsole to a rubberized foam outsole, which made the shoe’s ride one of the most cohesive and predictable that I’ve ever experienced. For those reasons, the Hoka wins out. The Mach 4’s fit was slightly longer than the Glycerin in my M9.5.

Michael: I agree with Ryan’s analysis of fit, and the conclusion. While I wasn’t quite as hot on the Mach 4 as he was, I still found it a more than adequate trainer, and a really, really fun option for runs that have to cover the spectrum of pace and effort. Again, I just didn’t quite find that same level of dynamism in the Glycerin. For long, slow, steady runs, I don’t think runners will be disappointed with the Brooks - but when the pace gets hot, you’ll want the Mach 4’s versatility. 

Products reviewed were provided at no charge for testing. The opinions herein are the authors'.

RTR Team's Best of 2020 Articles
Road Running Shoes HERE
Trail Running Shoes HERE
RTR Contributors Best of Run 2020, Year in Review Articles

Comments and Questions Welcome Below!
Please let us know mileage, paces, race distances, and current preferred shoes

RoadTrailRun receives a commission on purchases at the stores below.
Your purchases help support RoadTrailRun. Thanks!

19 Available Now! GTS 19 late February
USA  Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
FREE 2 Day Shipping EASY No Sweat Returns
EUROPE Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

19 Available Now!
Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
Join VIP Family, Get Free Shipping and 15% in VIP Benefits on every order, Details here

Available Now!
Men's & Women's SHOP HERE

Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
FREE Shipping on most orders over $40

Men's & Women's  SHOP HERE


Please Like and Follow RoadTrailRun
Facebook:  Instagram: @roadtrailrun
Twitter: @RoadTrailRun You Tube: @RoadTrailRun


Jeff said...


Vaad said...

With regards to NovaBlast, I've looked at runners in this shoe and they tend to pronate which for myself and rigid high arch supinators could be good. Would you say the "stability issues" of NovaBlast are of the medial sense or lateral as well? Thank you

Adamas said...

Great review!

I have been running in the Adrenaline GTS for years (over-pronator with borderline narrow feet and flat feet). I want to try something with more cushioning and will most definitely be getting the Glycerin GTS 19.

Adamas said...

Great review!

I have been running in the Adrenaline GTS for years (over-pronator with borderline narrow feet and flat feet). I want to try something with more cushioning and will most definitely be getting the Glycerin GTS 19.

Darrele said...

I love how you took measurements of the width and stack height. The photos with the graphics representing the increases are so helpful!

Jeff said...


I've found the Novablast stability issues aren't really about one side over the other, more that the shoe overall feels unbalanced. Walking, running, doesn't matter, I constantly felt like I was about to roll and ankle. The midsole is soft and bouncy, but the design/geometry just doesn't work well with it to create a stable platform.


My pleasure. It's really easy since I have the calipers handy. I used to try to position the calipers in the photo. It wasn't so easy to hold the camera with one hand and shoe with properly positioned calipers on the other - the digital screen didn't always show up properly. But a little bit of photo editing gives the same information, but makes it easier to understand.

Kerblam said...

Thanks for the measurements - I had a bit of trouble with forefoot width in the past with some Brooks, but those extra millimeters you pointed out have solidified my plan to get the GTS version of this for long easy runs. Always enjoy the reviews and comparisons!

Ante said...

Great review! Looking for my next long run and marathon shoe with some stability. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts of the Brooks Glycerin 19 GTS vs the Hoka Arahi 5.

The other two shoes on my short list is Saucony Endorphin Shift and Hoka Mach 4.
I keep recommending your site to my friends all over Sweden, simply the best for shoe reviews - thanks!

Sam Winebaum said...

Hi Ante,
Thanks for kind words and for recommending RTR to friends.
None of the testers have run both but I have run Arahi 5. The Arahi is fairly firm at the heel as its J Frame of firmer foam also wraps around to the lateral side. It is a good light stability trainer best suited to faster paces for me and has plenty of cushion and an improved front rocker and some flexibility.
Glycerin GTS should be softer and its support stability comes from the GuideRails and not as much the foam underneath with the idea to stabilize the knee more than the foot as Arahi does. So very different. I personally don't care much for rail based stability as for me it impedes transitions more than I would like.
Hope this helps.
Sam, Editor

Thanks for reading Road Trail Run! See our index page with links 100’s of in depth shoe and gear reviews HERE. You can also follow RoadTrailRun on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram where we publish interesting run related content more frequently as well as links to our latest reviews.
Shopping through links on articles help support RoadTrail Run and is much appreciated!