Our verdict

We were excited to see Brooks finally deliver the long-awaited foam upgrade in the Cascadia 19, as the DNA Loft v3 makes the ride noticeably softer, smoother, and more enjoyable on the trails. During our lab testing and outdoor runs, we discovered that the shoe not only retains its trademark stability but is also more flexible than before. It remains an adventure-ready option with excellent comfort and durability. Although it’s still a touch heavy and slightly pricier, we believe this update marks a genuine step forward for the Cascadia line.

Pros

  • Softer, more responsive DNA Loft v3 foam
  • Outstanding stability
  • Enhanced flexibility
  • Highly versatile for both running and hiking
  • Reliable traction
  • Well-crafted, plush tongue
  • Excellent outsole durability
  • Best Cascadia to date
  • Good airflow

Cons

  • Still on the heavier side
  • Narrow toebox limits toe splay
  • Slight price increase

Who should buy

After testing the Cascadia 19, we believe it’s a solid choice for:

  • Long-time Cascadia fans who upgrade every one or two years. This is easily the best version so far.
  • Runners seeking a versatile, stable, and highly durable trail shoe.
  • Hikers or summer trail runners who value plush comfort paired with great ventilation.

Brooks Cascadia 19

Who should NOT buy

We believe that the Brooks Cascadia 19 isn’t the best pick for runners who prefer an agile, compact-feeling trail shoe. Its new ultra-wide midsole makes it feel more bulky than before. Based on our testing, we think shoes like the Nike Zegama 2 or the ASICS Gel Trabuco 13 deliver a smoother, more quick-moving ride for those who value agility.

Additionally, we think the Cascadia 19 may disappoint runners seeking deep, max-cushioned comfort for long ultras or recovery efforts. In our lab, the midsole’s protection level was moderate, not high. For that extra cushioning and and top-tier shock absorption, we’d suggest the ASICS Trabuco Max 4 or the HOKA Mafate 5 instead.

Brooks Cascadia 19 parts

Cushioning

Shock absorption

New

Shock absorption is fairly average at 128 SA in the forefoot and 107 SA in the heel, which doesn’t surprise us. The Cascadia has never aimed to be a max-stack shoe, and it maintains a moderate height that perfectly matches its versatile personality.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Shock absorption heel
Heel
Forefoot
Test results
Cascadia 19 128 SA
Average 122 SA
Compared to 68 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
62 SA
Shock absorption
160 SA

Energy return

New

We heavily criticized the DNA Loft v2 foam of the Cascadia 18 for its lack of energy return and dull, uninspiring ride. We even said, word for word: “Maybe, after 18 versions, it’s finally time to make the leap.”

Well, Brooks delivered. The Cascadia 19 now features DNA Loft v3, a supercritical EVA foam that feels lighter, springier, and smoother underfoot. Although this improvement comes with a slight increase in price, which we’ll discuss later.

But how much of an upgrade is it really? Version 18 reached 54.1% energy return in the heel and 57.1% in the forefoot, while this one hits 59.4% and 60.4% respectively. It’s not a revolutionary leap as we can't expect miracles from an EVA-based compound, yet the foam feels far more pleasant and soft underfoot.

Heel
Forefoot
Test results
Cascadia 19 59.4%
Average 55.8%
Compared to 68 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
44.0%
Energy return
76.0%

Heel stack

Running shoes keep getting taller each year, and Brooks responded by adding a few extra millimeters of foam to the Cascadia 19. The heel now measures 34.8 mm, up from 32.6 mm in the previous version.

However, since nearly every other shoe in the market has grown as well, the Cascadia 19 ends up feeling almost identical to its predecessor.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Heel stack
Test results
Cascadia 19 34.8 mm
Average 32.4 mm
Compared to 158 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
19.5 mm
Heel stack
44.7 mm

Forefoot stack

The forefoot now rises to 27.0 mm, marking a noticeable improvement over the previous 23.8 mm. Runners who felt the front of version 18 lacked cushioning will surely appreciate this update, as it brings significantly more foam and comfort.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Forefoot stack
Test results
Cascadia 19 27.0 mm
Average 24.9 mm
Compared to 158 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
13.4 mm
Forefoot stack
34.4 mm

Drop

We measured a 7.8 mm heel-to-toe drop that feels natural and adaptable to any footstrike. It’s slightly higher than the 6 mm claimed by Brooks, but we doubt this small difference will bother most runners.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Drop
Test results
Cascadia 19 7.8 mm
Average 7.6 mm
Compared to 157 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
-0.1 mm
Drop
17.3 mm

Midsole softness

Note: a low durometer measurement equals a soft material, whereas a high measurement means it's firm.

The new DNA Loft v3 foam features two distinct layers: a thinner one sitting above the plate and a larger one positioned underneath.

We measured this main slab at 20.0 HA of softness, 27% lower than version 18. This change fully explains why, beyond its slightly livelier bounce, we found the Cascadia 19 noticeably softer and far more enjoyable to run in.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Midsole softness
Test results
Cascadia 19 20.0 HA
Average 22.0 HA
We use an average of four tests. The photo shows one of those tests.
Compared to 134 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
9.1 HA
Midsole softness (soft to firm)
39.0 HA

Secondary foam softness

Note: a low durometer measurement equals a soft material, whereas a high measurement means it's firm.

The secondary layer sits above the plate and feels even softer at 18.0 HA.

Brooks Cascadia 19 DNA Loft supercritical EVA

It’s a clever design choice by Brooks, offering a well-balanced mix of stability under the plate and a comfort-focused touch closer to the foot.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Secondary foam softness
Test results
Cascadia 19 18.0 HA
Average 22.1 HA
We use an average of four tests. The photo shows one of those tests.

Rocker

With each rise in stack height, the Cascadia gains a slightly more curved midsole profile to balance the added foam. Still, it maintains a fairly traditional underfoot feel with a mild rocker, and it keeps the shoe versatile enough for hiking, just like always.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Rocker

Plate

New

The Trail Adapt plate, a longtime staple of the Cascadia line, remains in place to improve stability while also adding some protection against potential hazards.

Also, our video clearly shows the midsole setup: the lower foam layer, the Trail Adapt plate, and the softer upper layer.

Size and fit

Size

Brooks Cascadia 19 fits true to size (19 votes).

Small
True to size
Large

Owners of this shoe, how does it fit?

1 size small ½ size small True to size ½ size large 1 size large

Width / Fit

Brooks offers the Cascadia in both standard and wide sizes, though the wide version is only sold in select regions. We purchased a standard US 9 for our tests (as always) and created our gel mold of the interior.

Once solidified, we measured 95.7 mm in width, confirming a versatile design meant to accommodate a wide range of trail runners.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Width / Fit
Test results
Cascadia 19 95.7 mm
Average 95.5 mm
Compared to 79 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
89.8 mm
Width / Fit
99.9 mm

Toebox width

The toebox is slightly narrower than we expected at 72.5 mm, offering 2.7 mm less space than the previous Cascadia. That's a noticeable reduction in room for toe splay.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Toebox width
Test results
Cascadia 19 72.5 mm
Average 74.5 mm
Compared to 79 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
67.1 mm
Toebox width
85.3 mm

Toebox height

Toebox height is slightly lower than before, measuring 24.4 mm.

The difference isn’t huge and shouldn’t be a concern, as the upper material doesn’t create unwanted pressure. On the bright side, it enhances security on uneven terrain, keeping the foot securely in place.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Toebox height
Test results
Cascadia 19 24.4 mm
Average 27.1 mm
Compared to 79 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
21.5 mm
Toebox height
31.8 mm

Traction / Grip

Forefoot traction

Brooks relies on its in-house TrailTack Green compound rather than teaming up with rubber specialists like Vibram. We’re fine with that decision, as our tests showed a 0.51 score that ensures dependable grip across diverse surfaces and weather conditions.

Test results
Cascadia 19 0.51
Average 0.59
Compared to 15 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
0.35
Forefoot traction
0.81

Lug depth

The Cascadia has always been promoted as a versatile all-terrain shoe built for both varied trails and long hikes, which naturally rules out ultra-deep lugs. That’s why the 3.8 mm lugs make perfect sense to us.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Lug depth
Test results
Cascadia 19 3.8 mm
Average 3.5 mm
Compared to 157 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
1.5 mm
Lug depth
5.4 mm

Outsole design

New

The Cascadia 19’s TrailTack Green outsole features a multi-angled lug layout designed for all-terrain grip. The forefoot lugs point forward to maximize uphill traction, while the rear ones face backward for confident downhill braking. We also found central zigzag grooves to boost torsional flexibility and debris or water release.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Outsole design

Flexibility / Stiffness

The redesigned outsole and the supercritical DNA Loft v3 foam bring an unexpected yet welcome benefit for anyone seeking long-hike comfort or smooth trail running: flexibility has noticeably improved, giving the shoe a more natural feel.

Version 19 went down to 15.6N (from 17.3N in version 18) despite its higher stack and the same Trail Adapt plate.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Flexibility / Stiffness
Test results
Cascadia 19 15.6N
Average 14.4N
Compared to 68 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
3.2N
Flexibility <> Stiffness
26.4N

Weight

The Brooks Cascadia 19 shows a very slight weight drop from its predecessor, now coming in at 10.8 oz (306g) instead of 10.9 oz (310g).

Why isn’t it much lighter if the new foam is? Well, that’s because it also packs significantly more cushioning in both the heel and forefoot, balancing things out. Still, the Cascadia 19 remains a touch heavier than we’d like, and it's also heavier than its dimensions suggest. There's still work to do here, Brooks.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Weight
Test results
Cascadia 19 10.8 oz (306g)
Average 10.2 oz (289g)
Compared to 158 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
7.5 oz (213g)
Weight
12.7 oz (359g)

Breathability

Trail shoes benefit from having enough airflow to stay comfortable but not so much that warmth and protection are lost. That’s why we were happy to see the Cascadia 19 land at a 4/5 rating in our breathability test.

Brooks designed this upper with a lightweight, finely engineered mesh combined with more durable, comfort-focused materials in strategic zones. 

Under the microscope, we examined the mesh and found it nicely perforated for breathability, which perfectly explains the strong result we achieved in our test.

Brooks Cascadia 19 mesh

Overall, the upper makes a solid impression—not just for its performance but also for its build quality, especially considering the shoe’s price point.

Brooks Cascadia 19 microscope

The heel and midfoot are generously padded, delivering a plush feel, though airflow in these areas is naturally reduced to improve durability and maintain a secure fit.

Test results
Cascadia 19 4
Average 3.3
Compared to 134 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Breathability
5

Stability

Lateral stability test

The Cascadia 19 introduces a softer foam, which might make many assume stability has taken a hit.

However, that’s far from true. Brooks made a major adjustment to the midsole dimensions to preserve the series’ signature stable ride, though it does result in a bulkier shoe that may not appeal to everyone.

Torsional rigidity

Torsional rigidity stays at a solid 4/5, which we genuinely appreciate. Even with the Trail Adapt plate, Brooks managed to maintain a flexible feel thanks to the clever outsole design and the softer DNA Loft v3 foam.

Test results
Cascadia 19 4
Average 3.6
Compared to 152 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Torsional rigidity
5

Heel counter stiffness

Brooks also made a subtle but meaningful adjustment to the heel counter stiffness. In the previous model, we found it overly rigid and somewhat intrusive, but it’s now reduced to 4/5, striking a far better balance between comfort and stability.

Test results
Cascadia 19 4
Average 3
Compared to 150 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel counter stiffness
5

Midsole width - forefoot

Here’s where the Cascadia 19 truly sets itself apart from its predecessor: its platform is now impressively wide.

The previous version measured 112.6 mm, close to average, but version 19 jumps to a massive 121.5 mm, giving it outstanding stability despite the softer, more forgiving foam.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Midsole width - forefoot
Test results
Cascadia 19 121.5 mm
Average 112.5 mm
Compared to 158 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
102.1 mm
Midsole width - forefoot
124.3 mm

Midsole width - heel

The heel has also expanded to 101.3 mm, giving the Cascadia 19 proportions similar to many road stability shoes. This wider base greatly enhances stability, though it can make the shoe feel a bit bulky for hiking, where that extra width isn’t really necessary.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Midsole width - heel
Test results
Cascadia 19 101.3 mm
Average 89.6 mm
Compared to 158 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
72.0 mm
Midsole width - heel
106.0 mm

Durability

Toebox durability

We found a very solid outcome in our toebox durability test, with the Cascadia 19 earning a 4/5 score. The extra-durable toe bumper played a major role here, since we tested in the same standardized spot as in every other shoe.

Test results
Cascadia 19 4
Average 3.1
Compared to 115 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Toebox durability
5

Heel padding durability

Heel padding was less impressive, earning a 3/5 in our test, though it still passed our standards. We believe there’s room for improvement to make it more resilient and long-lasting.

Test results
Cascadia 19 3
Average 3
Compared to 114 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel padding durability
5

Outsole durability

The TrailTack Green rubber truly impressed us. Using our tire tread gauge, we discovered that only 0.7 mm of material wore away, a remarkably low number that highlights its excellent durability.

Test results
Cascadia 19 0.7 mm
Average 0.9 mm
Compared to 108 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
0.0 mm
Outsole wear
2.0 mm

Outsole thickness

The outsole measures 1.9 mm in thickness, and we believe Brooks could easily trim it slightly further if needed to shave off a bit of extra weight.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Outsole thickness measurement
Test results
Cascadia 19 1.9 mm
Average 2.3 mm
Compared to 158 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
0.9 mm
Outsole thickness
5.5 mm

Misc

Insole thickness

From the entire cushioning setup, we measured that 5.0 mm come from the insole itself.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Insole thickness
Test results
Cascadia 19 5.0 mm
Average 4.7 mm
Compared to 155 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
2.1 mm
Insole thickness
7.9 mm

Removable insole

The insole is removable, as we confirmed during testing. However, it’s nicely perforated to boost ventilation, a superb touch that makes it worth keeping rather than swapping for another option.

Test results
Cascadia 19 Yes

Midsole softness in cold (%)

The shift from basic EVA to supercritical EVA is a welcome improvement, but at the end of the day, it’s still EVA. So we weren’t expecting standout results in our 20-minute freezer test, and indeed, the Cascadia 19 showed a 30% drop in softness.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Midsole softness in cold (%)
Test results
Cascadia 19 30%
Average 26%
Compared to 134 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
5%
Midsole softness in cold
64%

Reflective elements

Unfortunately, we didn’t find any reflective elements on the Cascadia 19. While it’s not a major flaw, we always appreciate to have them for low-light runs, and considering how easy and inexpensive they are...

Brooks Cascadia 19 Reflective elements
Test results
Cascadia 19 No

Tongue padding

The Cascadia’s lacing system uses a hybrid setup combining punched eyelets with two loops on each side. The slightly textured laces feel good, and we loved the elastic band that neatly keeps them in place.

Brooks Cascadia 19 lace band

When it comes to comfort, Brooks didn’t hold back. The tongue is generously padded, measuring 10.1 mm with our digital calipers. Sure, it adds a bit of weight, but we think the trade-off is worth it.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Tongue padding
Test results
Cascadia 19 10.1 mm
Average 6.4 mm
Compared to 158 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
1.3 mm
Tongue padding
12.3 mm

Tongue: gusset type

We appreciated that the tongue is fully attached to the sides, which enhances lockdown and keeps out debris for a cleaner, more secure running experience.

Brooks Cascadia 19 Tongue: gusset type
Test results
Cascadia 19 Both sides (full)

Price

The Cascadia 19 sees a slight price increase over its predecessor, but we think it’s absolutely justified if that’s the cost of the foam upgrade. Brands often raise prices after major updates, and we hope this one to stay steady for the next 2-3 years.

Test results
Cascadia 19 $150
Average $152
Compared to 158 trail running shoes
Number of shoes
$60
Price
$275

Heel tab

The heel features a thin, horizontal finger-loop tab that left us a bit uncertain, as it looks less sturdy than a traditional wider loop. Still, despite our strong tugs during testing, it held up perfectly, so time will tell...

Brooks Cascadia 19 Heel tab
Test results
Cascadia 19 Finger loop