Article by Courtney Kelly, Sam Winebaum, Ben David, and Sally Reiley
Brooks Glycerin Max 2 ($200)
Introduction
The Glycerin Max is Brooks entry in the super max cushioned trainer category. At a massive 45 mm heel and 39mm forefoot, it is stacked with DNA Tuned dual density nitrogen infused supercritical foam, has a supportive upper and plenty of rubber for long wear.
Sam: For its 2nd version it sees a change in the front rocker geometry to improve transitions (a good move), and a new upper.
Unplated and competing with shoes such as Nike’s Vomero Plus and Premium and Hoka’s Bondi 9, New Balance More v6, the Max 2 clearly seems to lean towards those easier runs where plush comfort is the order of the day, and speed is not the priority and even more so here, as its already substantial weight increases to about 11.35 oz / 321g in a US M9.
Ben: The Glycerin Max 2 picks up where its predecessor left off. This is Brooks’ premium Super Max, super-cushioned daily trainer. Both iterations of the shoe challenge the longstanding Brooks identity as perpetually safe (re: boring) and not overly flashy.
For me, the first version of the Glycerin Max was a sensational daily trainer. It was light, responsive, protective and a lot of fun to run in at most paces. I picked it as my overall shoe of the year in 2024. As with any sequel, the concern was that it couldn’t possibly live up to the original (see also: Star Wars, Rocky, Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park, The Hangover, etc).
There’s good news and bad news here: The bad: This is not the same shoe as the first version. As Sam points out, it’s heavier, runs heavier, and lacks some of the earlier responsiveness. The good: This is still going to be a great option for a lot of people as it still offers a great outsole, plush upper and even an upgraded rocker.
Pros:
High cushioned and soft (also a Con): Sam
Supremely comfortable and secure upper with lots of support: __, Courtney/Sam/Sally/Ben
Rocker geometry improved: Courtney/Sam/Ben
Points for style! This shoe looks great: Courtney/Sam/Sally
Easy to lace up and get out the door -Courtney/Sam
Excellent choice for plush fitness walking and on your feet all day: Sam/Sally
Cons:
Over stuffed/stacked upfront at 39mm makes them somewhat awkward and stiff: Courtney/Sam/Sally
6mm drop and no flex relying on the rocker: higher drop lower forefoot in order here: Sam/Sally
Soft foam and so much of it make them somewhat unstable and mushy riding, not recommended for runners light in weight: Sam/Sally
Heavy and gains weight on v1, not sure how Courtney/Sam/Sally/Ben
- Still very much a slower, heavier shoe: Courtney/Sam/Sally
- Limited versatility and pricey: Ghost Max, Glycerin and Hyperion Max better choices for me: Sam/Sally
Brooks should have been more daring at the price point and used with their lighter more energetic DNA Gold PEBA foam here to compete with Megablast and Vomero Plus
Stats
Approx. Weight: men's 11.35 oz / 321g US9 women’s 10.5oz / 296g US8
Sample Weights:
men’s 11.1oz / 314g US8.5 (up from v1:10.6 oz / 301g US8.5)
women’s: 9.8 oz / 280 g (US W8) (up from V1: 9.2 oz / 261g US W8)
Stack Height: 45 mm heel / 39 mm forefoot (confirming)
Platform Width:
V2: 90 mm heel / 85mm midfoot / 115 mm forefoot US M8.5
V1: 90 mm heel / 90 mm midfoot / 115 mm forefoot US M8.5
Most comparable shoes
Nike Vomero Premium and Plus) -Sally/Sam/Ben
New Balance Fresh Foam More - Sally/Sam/Ben
Hoka Bondi 9-Sam
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Courtney: The Glycerin Max 2 arrived a year after the launch of V1. The Glycerin Max 1 was a shoe that fell below my expectations, so I was looking forward to trying the GM 2 to see if Brooks made some improvements.
The shoe maintains its unique and attractive look, and its clear this shoe is still a Glycerin Max with its towering stack of DNA Tuned foam. The cyber pink foam is visible through the translucent oyster/argyle colored foam in the midsole.
The upper is made of a jacquard mesh with breathable slit-like areas that echo the design elements in the foam. The result is a breathable and comfortable upper.
Adding to the comfort of the shoe is the well padded tongue and easy lacing system. There was very little fussing with the laces to get a good fit. The laces grip well to the eyelets and finding the just right lockdown of the shoe is easy, and one of the best I have tested.
Single knot only on these shoes and run out the door!
The heel is generously padded at the collar and the heel hold is excellent.
Sam: Not much to add to Courtney’s take on the look and upper: a beautifully styled and fitting upper of the more supportive type with a massive heel yet comfortable heel counter.
Very similar in fit to the first version, it is perfectly true to size for my narrow to medium feet. I did note during an A/B test run with v1 that there is a touch more toe box height in v2 with about the same width. Overall, it's a superb upper for the shoe’s purpose.
Sally: I am totally in agreement with Sam and Courtney’s take on this nice looking and great fitting upper that holds my slightly narrow foot securely and comfortably. FIts true to size and very similar to V1. Laces for me are excessively long once I snug them down; the thick cushioning of the tongue and heel collar, though comfortable, are also a bit excessive and must contribute to the shoe’s heaviness.
Ben: As my fellow reviewers noted, this is a true-to-size, very plush daily trainer. As was the case with V1, my size 9 felt just right. I found the upper almost too cushioned and struggled a bit to get great lockdown, though nothing egregious or problematic. This shoe is really comfortable upon step-in and will work not only for runners, but those on their feet for longer periods of time.
Midsole & Platform
Courtney: As with version 1, Brooks has used their DNA TUNED foam compound to specify areas of high cushion and areas with more firmness in the midsole. At the heel, there are larger cells for absorbing the most impact and smaller cells at the forefoot for a firmer toe off.
Brooks has swapped out the multiple grooves in the midsole for one deeper groove running down the length of the shoe. I believe this created more compression at the rear of the shoe resulting in what feels like an even lower drop than the 6mm. With the addition of the firmer forefoot, the shoe feels oddly unbalanced.
The Glycerin V2’s medial sidewall has been lowered, which might be a concerning area for stability.
Brooks has widened the medial sole flare all the way through the heel to the forefoot creating a hefty platform (90mm heel /85mm mid/1115mm forefoot).
That said, Sam measures the platform at 5mm narrower at the midfoot than v1 so effectively it has a slightly narrower platform at midfoot..
The revisions to the rocker design are a step in the right direction. The heel bevel is designed at a steeper angle promoting a faster heel to toe transition and I noticed that the roll through the stride is considerably easier than V1.
This being said, the Glycerin has created some soreness up the kinetic chain for me, specifically in the hips. I also noticed my ground contact time was significantly higher (252 average vs. 230s. typical) which could be due to the softness at the heel creating some instability I am trying to compensate for.
Sam: Soft and massively cushioned the Max 2 for sure is plush underfoot on try on helped by the superb upper. At 45mm heel / 39mm forefoot and a 6mm drop the forefoot is notably high and the drop at 6mm clearly a design challenge in terms of transitions. They were unwieldy at slower paces which in my view is the intent of the shoe uses given the stack height and considerable weight.
Brooks has tuned the previous abrupt rocker with what feels like a slightly longer ramp and through some neat looking cuts into the midfoot sidewalls allow the foot to sink forward more easily than before. During a brief A/B test run with v1 on the other foot on tired legs these improvements was clearly felt.
The DNA Tuned dual density foams are molded together without glue. This may help reduce weight but I do not feel the added response called out for the smaller front (green below) cells that much. I do feel too much rear softness in the less dense rear foam and a pillowy unstable feel despite the massive heel counter.
As with Kelly I was more sore in my admittedly bad knee after than usual after short runs in them. At 160 lbs I felt the same softness as my considerably lighter colleagues. Would a heavier runner get a more decisive rebound?
Is the central rear groove too deep, the narrower platform too narrow for the stack height? Not sure but as with Courtney, Sally and I found the midsole and platform strangely unstable at easy paces (for me 10:30 per mile or slower paces and tending to heel strike ) as I still struggled to get forward and toe off smoothly as the shoe is rigid and this despite the clearly improved front rocker. I think a lower forefoot stack height, more flex and more drop are in order.
Sally: Sam and Courtney do a great job going deep into the intricacies of this midsole, as we are seemingly trying to puzzle out why this shoe is not working for our running styles. I came to a quicker conclusion that this nitrogen infused DNA tuned foam (same as V1) is simply not as much fun as the newer peppier and lighter foams available today.
The heel is soft and yet not at all responsive for me, and though there is a fairly aggressive rocker geometry, my foot did not roll smoothly to toe-off. Perhaps Sam is correct in that this shoe works best for a heavier runner? At 105 pounds with a light-on-my feet stride, I find this shoe flat: disappointingly firm with no bounce or energy return.
Ben: The midsole is the story of the shoe in more ways than one. In spite of a great foam, the shoe runs somewhat bulky and firm (to me). I agree that it’s just not as much fun as V1. I had trouble getting the foam to compress (at 150lbs), which only presented itself as a problem when trying to pick up the pace. When ‘cruising,’ I found it to be … fine, though certainly not lively or full of pep. The issue for me is that the shoe looks fast, and even feels fast when first put on, but the overall weight of the shoe, combined with the harsh firmness of its ride, leaves it feeling anything but fast.
Outsole
Courtney: The outsole of V2 has been improved with more rubber coverage while still providing lateral grooves for flex and traction. Overall flex is minimal because of the very thick and stiff forefoot. The diagonal grooves in the rubber lose some of the raised areas of V1, allowing better engagement with the ground. I found V2 gripped well on multiple surfaces and handled turns well.
Sam: A perfectly fine outsole with great grip and appropriate coverage.
I do think modifying the front design to give the sole more flex is in order, potentially with grooves across the front.
Sally: The outsole on this shoe works great and has a nice sticky grip even on wet surfaces. It is relatively quiet on the roads, and as an added bonus has no deep grooves to catch gravel.
Ben: I agree with others that the outsole is one of the successes of the shoe. It has great coverage and offers reliable grip.
Ride, Conclusions and Recommendations
Courtney: Although there are some clear revisions, Brooks has maintained the essential components that make a Glycerin Max a Glycerin Max. The increased firmness of the shoe has assisted in less sinking-in compared to V1, but I still wish for more responsiveness overall.
My most enjoyable runs in the Glycerin were my short 3 to 4 mile runs, while a 7.5 mile run felt harder than it should have at a slow pace (8:05 average).
It is possible that someone of larger stature would be better suited for this shoe as the compression and response of the foam might get better. I do think this shoe provides protection for short distance runs and is a good walking shoe that looks pretty cool. It is hard for me to recommend longer runs in this shoe, as even mid-distance runs felt taxing.
Overall 8.03/10
Ride: 7/10 energy return was lacking in the Max mostly due to the heaviness of the shoe. Cushion is firmer and roll forward improved over V1
Fit: 9.5/10 Excellent first first and lockdown, plenty of padding
Value 8/10 -Expensive for a shoe I only can see for shorter distance easy running
Style 9.5/10 -Brooks is doing a great job with the style of their shoes.
😊😊😊
Sam: Massive, soft and plush the Max 2 sees some minor midsole geometry revisions to improve its transitions which were clearly felt during my A/B run with v1. The upper is superb and a near 10/10 in my book for the shoe’s intended uses.
The ride is quite soft, and pleasant but lacking in decisive return and somewhat mushy and is not particularly rear stable given the stack height. While the rocker is improved, the transitions are still somewhat ponderous and the toe off, while improved with a slightly longer rocker, still not responsive or smooth enough for me. The weight is for sure also a contributing factor to the somewhat ponderous ride as it is way up there at over 11 oz in a US9 leading to a heavy feeling ride.
Brooks should have been more daring at the price point and used with their lighter more energetic DNA Gold PEBA foam here to compete with Megablast and Vomero Plus
I personally see limited run uses for the shoe as it is somewhat unstable and hard to turn over ponderous at slow recovery paces and quite heavy for more general daily training paces. At $200, pricing is up there so value is not the best. That said, if you are a heavier runner with good neutral form, you may find it a good option.
All is not lost though as for sure it is about as plush and protective a walking and standing on your feet all day shoe as one can find with the superb upper only adding to its overall comfort.
Sam’s Score: 8.27 /10
Ride (50%): 7.5 Fit (30%): 9.7 Value (15%): 7.5 Style (5%): 9.7
😊😊😊 Smiles for Fit and Style, less so for Ride
Sally: I did not love the Glycerin Max 1 but I had high expectations for V2 in light of some of the fantastic new Brooks shoes of late (The Hyperion Elite 5 is one of my favorite race shoes of 2025). My mother taught me that if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all; if I followed Mom’s advice all the time I would be a pretty bad shoe reviewer.
The ride of the Glycerin Max 2 for me was flat, overly firm, no pop, no fun. Sam reports transitions still somewhat ponderous but I find them downright clumsy and awkward and slow.
The heel is soft but for me has no energy return or bounce. I am typically a midfoot striker but found myself back on my heels in this shoe.
We have all hypothesized that runners of larger stature might be better suited for this shoe as the compression and response of the foam might be better; there are several other shoes that I have found don’t work well for my flyweight. This shoe also tips the scales as one of the heavier trainers but unfortunately for me it feels even heavier on my feet. But it is indeed a fine well-cushioned and decent looking walking shoe! At $200, would you buy it for this? I am sorry but I have to admit I am sadly disappointed.
Sally’s Score: 7.86 /10
Ride (50%): 6.5 (lowest score I have given in a while but the ride was totally bleh for me)
Fit (30%): 10 (excellent well-fitting and supportive upper)
Value (15%): 7.5 ($200 is a lot for such a limited use shoe)
Style (5%): 9.5 (nice looking, best suited for cushioned walks)
😊😊1/2 Smiles for Fit, frowns for Ride
Ben:I believe there will be a subset of people who will take well to the Glycerin Max V2. While its predecessor worked for so many of us, this has become more of a niche shoe, perhaps for larger runners or those not looking for an overly plush ride. It offers a massive stack, good toe-off and lots of protection. The problem is that we want to compare it to its predecessor (as we should), but it’s just not the same shoe, nor is it nearly as stellar. It’s not nearly as fun or energetic, in spite of its changes. I did not love it and, in a very crowded market, will not be reaching for it regularly.
Ben’s Score 7.6/10
😊😊😊
8 Comparisons
Brooks Glycerin (RTR Review)
Sam: Higher drop at 10mm, 1 oz lighter and still substantially stacked with close to the same forgiving foam feel but in a single density more reactively tuned, the regular and simpler Glycerin is a better all around trainer with a wider pace range and at $165 is a better value.
Sally: Both true to size in W8 and both feature Brooks’ winning uppers, but the Glycerin 22 is a much more versatile and lighter daily trainer that rides more smoothly and picks up the paces better. Save your money and skip the Max.
Brooks Hyperion Max 3 (RTR Review)
Sam: An ounce lighter at about the same stack height and faster in its intentions, the Hyperion Max 3 for sure leans tempo paces with its combination of quite aggressive plastic plate and DNA Gold PEBA foam. Its upper is more performance oriented and less plush. If walking is your use clearly the Glycerin Max. If faster training clearly the Hyperion Max. Both are priced the same at $200.
Brooks Ghost Max 3 (RTR Review)
Sam; At a stack height of 39mm heel / 33mm forefoot and priced at $160 the Ghost is a more reasonably priced and versatile plush trainer. Its upper is not quite the deluxe plush of the Glycerin but it is an easy pick for me over the Max.
Ben: The Ghost Max 3 is not as outrageous as the Glycerin Max 2 in most categories: stack, cushion, price… but it is a solid daily trainer, very reliable and capable. I really liked it and found it surprisingly willing to run at most paces. Factor in the better pricetag and I’d probably go with the Ghost Max 3.
Nike Vomero Premium (RTR Review)
Sam: Somehow Nike managed to stack the Premium to 55 mm at the heel / 45mm at the forefoot so 10mm higher than the Max. Yet this giant is a far more run-able, fun, broader pace range super super max trainer, even if its weight is slightly higher yet.
How do they do it? Light reactive Zoom X foam plus front and back Air Zoom units for response and stability (each backed by a plastic frame), somehow a more effective front rocker, along with a fuller coverage outsole I think are the keys.
The uppers are both excellent and fit very similarly but I will lean to the smoother fitting Max’s.
While $30 more than the Max, if a super plush effective ride is your need, the Nike.
Sally: Hands down the Nike Vomero Premium! Both true to size in W8 for me, both high stack and max cushion but very different rides. The Nike is lighter and bouncier and more responsive and quicker and more versatile and more FUN. It might look gimmicky but it is incredibly runnable, whereas the Brooks looks traditional but it is challenging for me to get moving.
Nike Vomero Plus (RTR Review)
Sam: Nike's other big new max trainer checks in at the same 45 mm at the heel but has a welcome 10mm drop and reasonably low yet still highly cushioned forefoot at 35mm, so 4mm lower than the Max’s. This geometry translates to smoother transitions at all paces than the Max. With its all ZoomX supercritical relatively soft but not mushy PEBA midsole, and fuller and more extensive outsole, we get a true max daily trainer for everything except intervals or fast short tempos for me. And it is 42g / 1.48 oz lighter than the Max and $20 less. No real contest here.
Sally: Nike wins! No contest.
Hoka Bondi 9 (RTR Review)
Sam: More than an ounce lighter on a slightly lower stack height, the Bondi for the first time gets a supercritical foam midsole and a lively one. A far more flexible shoe, it manages to not be ponderous despite its big stack height and has a broader range of potential training paces for me than the Max from easy recovery to moderate pace daily training. The upper is generous in fit and true to size with wides also available, unlike the Max.
UA x Speedland Infinite Mega (RTR Review)
Sam: While we are on soft and plush, the Mega with its BOA dial “open” heel handles easy paces more smoothly and can truly double as a slipper! It fits literally all foot shapes securely due to the two dial BOA Fit System with its heel area a sharp contrast to the Max’s big and heavy heel counter. Slightly lighter, it is a more versatile option but a considerably more expensive one at $250.
Skechers Aero Burst (RTR Review)
Courtney: The Aero Burst is a similarly max stacked trainer made for easy daily miles. The midsole HYPERburst dual combination foam is soft and somewhat responsive but at 10.0 ounces this shoe is still hefty.. It is slightly lighter than the Glycerin and this is noticeable on foot. You may think at $150 you are getting a deal, but you may be sacrificing comfort and that nice dialed-in fit that the Glycerin does so well.
Ben: I’m with Courtney. While the Aero Burst is also not a light daily trainer, it is still lighter than the Glycerin Max V2. It also offers a stabilizing plate which helps keep the large stack under control. It’s also much less expensive and, at least for me, was refreshing and fun to run in. I’d go with the Skechers (something I don’t often say)!!
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
Tester Profiles
Courtney Kelly, age 37 is a college lacrosse player turned avid runner. She lives in Manchester, MA with her husband and two daughters ages 4 and 8. Courtney signed up for her first 1/2 marathon the morning of the race in 2022, winning second place in a time of 1:26. She decided to take running a bit more seriously, joining Wicked Running Club and trying some training plans. She ran her first marathon this fall in 3:04:27. In addition, she holds a half marathon PR of 1:25, a 5 mile PR 30:17, and a 5k PR of 18:20. She looks forward to getting some more strength and speed under her belt this next season, before taking a crack at the marathon again. She is 5’4”, 110 lbs.Off the roads, Courtney is a painter and loving mother to her girls.
Ben is the Senior Rabbi of Reform Congregation Keneseth Israel of Elkins Park, PA. A cancer survivor, he has run 23 marathons. He holds PRs of 3:15 for the marathon and 1:30 for the half. At 46, he still enjoys pushing himself and combining his running with supporting a variety of causes. Follow him on Instagram: @RabbiBPD or Twitter: @BDinPA
Sally is a lifelong runner and mother of five who agreed against her better judgment to run her first marathon at age 54; she has since run the past twelve Boston Marathons, three NYC Marathons, two Chicagos, and one London with the WMM Six Star Medal now in her sights (Berlin in 2025, Tokyo 2026). With a Boston PR of 3:25:55 in 2022 and three consecutive 2nd place in Age Group awards in NYC, along with 2nd at Berlin in 2025. She has competed in several Abbott WMM Age Group World Championships and placed 6th in the world in W 60-64 when she ran an all-time PR of 3:24:02 at age 63 at the 2022 London Marathon and 3d in her age group at 2025 NYC Abbott World Championships. She also competes in USATF races of all distances with the Greater Lowell Road Runners team. To add meaning to her Boston Marathon races she runs with Team Eye and Ear and has raised over $350,000 for Massachusetts Eye and Ear Hospital. Sally stands tall at 5’2’’ and 105 pounds, and lives in Marblehead, MA where she trains outdoors year round. She blames her love of skiing out West for any and all Boston Marathon training challenges.
Sam is the Editor and Founder of Road Trail Run. He is in his 60’s with 2025 Sam’s 54th year of running roads and trails. He has a decades old 2:28 marathon PR. These days he runs halves in the just sub 1:43 range. if he gets very, very lucky. Sam trains 30-40 miles per week mostly at moderate paces on the roads and trails of New Hampshire and Park City, Utah be it on the run, hiking or on nordic skis. He is 5’9” tall and weighs about 160 lbs, if he is not enjoying too many fine New England IPA’s.
Europe only: use RTR code RTR5ALL for 5% off all products, even sale products
1 comment:
DNA Tuned midsole foam is soft under heel, slightly firmer in forefoot for Ragdoll Hit a more controlled toe-off.
Post a Comment