Our verdict

The Glycerin Max is Brooks’ ambitious response to the rise of ultra-cushioned running shoes. We found it truly provides cloud-like comfort underfoot, protecting your muscles and joints with its innovative DNA Tuned midsole. We also found that the plush, breathable upper offers a premium, glove-like fit—though this luxurious feel comes at a cost in terms of price and weight, both being higher than we hoped.

Pros

  • Massive cushioning
  • Luxurious yet breathable upper
  • Innovative DNA Tuned midsole
  • Eye-catching look
  • Surprisingly stable
  • Can be used as a walking shoe
  • Premium materials

Cons

  • Too heavy
  • Bulky, non-gusseted tongue
  • Poor rubber coverage
  • High price tag

Audience verdict

90
Great!

Who should buy

The Brooks Glycerin Max is a maximalist running shoe that will excel for:

  • Brooks fans who’ve turned to other brands for a true max-cushion shoe. It's finally here.
  • Runners seeking a plush, comfort-driven daily trainer that emphasizes support over speed.
  • Marathoners who value max protection on easy and recovery runs to help preserve their legs.
  • Anyone who loves Brooks' step-in feel and wants a running shoe that doubles as a sneaker.

Brooks Glycerin Max

Who should NOT buy

One of the main issues with the Glycerin Max is its weight—it definitely could be lighter. This isn’t a problem for easy or slow-paced runs but could be a drawback for runners seeking a shoe that can handle faster speeds. There are better options at this price, like the ASICS Superblast 2 or Mizuno Neo Vista.

We also feel that the Glycerin Max's performance doesn’t justify its high price. The DNA Tuned midsole delivers similar energy return to the Hoka Mach 6 and ASICS Novablast 4, yet it comes at a considerably higher cost—making it a tough choice for those after the best value.

Brooks Glycerin Max parts

Additionally, the limited rubber coverage on the outsole raised durability concerns here in the lab. For those prioritizing a sturdy, maximalist shoe with a better, more durable outsole, the Puma MagMax Nitro is a superior model.

Cushioning

Heel stack

Brooks advertised a 47-mm stack height for the Glycerin Max, but our measurement came in at 42.3 mm. Still, it surpasses the 40 mm threshold that unofficially defines the "maximalist" category—an outcome we find really appealing for the heaviest runners out there.

Notably, this makes it the first Brooks shoe to cross that threshold, with the Ghost Max 2 capping off at 39.0 mm.

Brooks Glycerin Max Heel stack
Test results
Glycerin Max 42.3 mm
Average 33.9 mm
Compared to 365 running shoes
Number of shoes
22.5 mm
Heel stack
46.3 mm

Forefoot stack

In our view, while the heel cushioning is impressive, the forefoot is where this shoe truly stands out from a daily trainer. We believe that if you enjoyed the Glycerin 21 but wanted a boost in cushioning, this feels like the most natural upgrade—with an additional 5.1 mm in the heel and 9.1 mm more under the forefoot!

This yellow section contains the most responsive part of DNA Tuned, engineered with smaller cells to create a lively, bouncy feel directly underfoot.

Brooks Glycerin Max Forefoot stack
Test results
Glycerin Max 35.7 mm
Average 25.3 mm
Compared to 365 running shoes
Number of shoes
13.7 mm
Forefoot stack
37.1 mm

Drop

You probably guessed it—the Glycerin series, traditionally a high-drop design, now uses a more balanced drop, which is the same modification that Brooks did with the Ghost. We measured a 6.6 mm difference between the heel and forefoot, only deviating 0.6 mm from Brooks' stated 6 mm.

This moderate drop suits midfoot strikers perfectly, yet with such plush cushioning and a pronounced curved heel, we believe it’s versatile enough to work for all footstrikes.

Brooks Glycerin Max Drop
Test results
Glycerin Max 6.6 mm
Average 8.6 mm
Compared to 365 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.0 mm
Drop
16.1 mm

Midsole softness

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

First, we tested the yellow section of DNA Tuned, which supports the forefoot, midfoot, and half of the heel.

Our durometer registered a 19.9 HA score, aligning with our running experience—the shoe feels really plush and compliant thanks to its towering stack height but stops short of the ultra-soft feel seen in models like the New Balance Fresh Foam X More v5.

Brooks Glycerin Max Midsole softness
Test results
Glycerin Max 19.9 HA
Average 21.1 HA
We use an average of four tests. The photo shows one of those tests.
Compared to 292 running shoes
Number of shoes
8.5 HA
Midsole softness (soft to firm)
38.9 HA

Secondary foam softness

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

We took a second measurement in the white section of DNA Tuned, which sits in half of the heel and is especially noticeable for rearfoot strikers. Interestingly, it came back with the exact same durometer reading—19.9 HA—yet feels remarkably softer than the forefoot while running.

Why? It’s all about the foam structure. As we showed in the microscope images, despite identical softness, the foam cells in the white section are broader and more open, allowing them to absorb impact effectively but without bouncing back as quickly.

Brooks Glycerin Max Secondary foam softness
Test results
Glycerin Max 19.9 HA
Average 23.9 HA
We use an average of four tests. The photo shows one of those tests.

Midsole softness in cold (%)

To assess the Glycerin Max's performance in extreme cold, we tested it by placing the shoe in a freezer for 20 minutes next to our pistachio ice creams before re-evaluating it. Following the freeze, we observed a 17% change—quite impressive for an EVA-based midsole.

Brooks Glycerin Max Midsole softness in cold (%)
Test results
Glycerin Max 17%
Average 26%
Compared to 292 running shoes
Number of shoes
0%
Midsole softness in cold
100%

Insole thickness

After checking the midsole with our calipers, we turned our focus to the insole. We found a recycled EVA footbed, measuring 6.0 mm thick, adding a soft, eco-friendly layer of cushioning directly underfoot as the first point of contact.

Brooks Glycerin Max Insole thickness
Test results
Glycerin Max 6.0 mm
Average 4.5 mm
Compared to 361 running shoes
Number of shoes
1.5 mm
Insole thickness
7.3 mm

DNA Tuned

A standout feature of the Glycerin Max is its innovative foam, DNA Tuned, which introduces a world-first manufacturing process: a dual midsole merging two densities seamlessly into a single slab of foam.

Is this groundbreaking and will change the industry like PEBA? No, but it’s a nice advancement. Less glue translates to a more eco-friendly manufacturing process and fewer potential breaking points. While we’ve seen glued dual-foam setups, like in the On Cloudmonster Hyper, this marks the first time it's done glue-free in a running shoe.

Brooks Glycerin Max DNA Tuned midsole

Naturally, we put DNA Tuned under our microscope! In the left image, the yellow foam (firmer) displays a denser cell network with thicker walls, offering a more reactive feel for faster toe-offs. On the right side, the white foam shows an airier, more uniform cell structure, creating a cushier feel under the heel.

These variations in cell thickness and arrangement highlight how the foam delivers a balanced blend of support and cushioning across different zones of the Glycerin Max.

Brooks Glycerin Max DNA Tuned foam

Rocker

Brands understand that a running shoe with over 40 mm of stack height requires a pronounced toe rocker, and the Glycerin Max delivers on this front. We discovered that it rises up to an impressive 6 cm, easing transitions despite the midsole’s thick construction.

Brooks Glycerin Max side

There's also a subtle heel bevel, though not as aggressive as in other maximalist designs like the Hoka Cielo X1. From our perspective, this shoe feels tailored to easy or slow paces, with Brooks carefully positioning it to avoid cannibalizing the sales of their Hyperion Max 2 performance trainer.

Brooks Glycerin Max Rocker

Size and fit

Size

Brooks Glycerin Max is true to size (149 votes).

Owners of this shoe, how does this shoe fit?

1 size small ½ size small True to size ½ size large 1 size large
Compared to 302 running shoes
Number of shoes
½ size small
Slightly small
True to size
Slightly large
½ size large

Toebox width - widest part

One of the best aspects of maximalist running shoes is their generous build, which often translates to a more accommodating upper. In our experience, the Glycerin Max follows suit, offering an upper that’s fairly standard in width at 98.0 mm at the widest part but feels surprisingly roomy.

This roomy feel comes from the high volume of the upper and a slightly broader midfoot area. The extra space here contributes to a more relaxed, comfort-driven fit, making it ideal for recovery runs.

Brooks Glycerin Max Toebox width - widest part
Test results
Glycerin Max 98.0 mm
Average 98.5 mm
Compared to 366 running shoes
Number of shoes
91.6 mm
Toebox width - widest part
104.9 mm

Toebox width - big toe

We recorded a second measurement in the big toe area, which came in at 79.1 mm.

Brooks Glycerin Max pov

As we said before, the fit is a bit roomier than the numbers suggest, thanks to the high-volume design and the comfort-focused, plush engineered mesh.

Brooks Glycerin Max Toebox width - big toe
Test results
Glycerin Max 79.1 mm
Average 78.4 mm
Compared to 240 running shoes
Number of shoes
67.6 mm
Toebox width - big toe
89.2 mm

Stability

Lateral stability test

With an enormous, towering stack height, it’s natural to wonder—is this shoe stable at all?

Surprisingly, it is! In our experience, this reflects a growing trend in maximalist shoes and supertrainers, where brands incorporate subtle stability features like sidewalls or sole flares. This approach often makes these shoes even more stable than average daily trainers, which seems...crazy!

Torsional rigidity

Some maximalist shoes rely on a Pebax or carbon plate for stability, but Brooks took a different approach. From a comfort perspective, we appreciate this choice—being plateless enhances the cushioned, plush feel, especially at slower paces. We awarded it a 4/5 for torsional rigidity.

Test results
Glycerin Max 4
Average 3.3
Compared to 344 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Torsional rigidity
5

Heel counter stiffness

We found the heel counter to be ultra-comfortable, with thick padding providing plush support around the area, and it surprised us with its flexibility—scoring a 3/5. In our experience, it’s not as firm as most maximalist shoes, which often rely on stiff counters for added stability.

Test results
Glycerin Max 3
Average 2.9
Compared to 328 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel counter stiffness
5

Midsole width - forefoot

The forefoot measures slightly wider than a regular Glycerin at 118.8 mm, and we think going any broader would have been overkill.

This width is enough for neutral forefoot and midfoot strikers, especially given the shoe’s already substantial weight.

Brooks Glycerin Max Midsole width - forefoot
Test results
Glycerin Max 118.8 mm
Average 114.0 mm
Compared to 366 running shoes
Number of shoes
103.3 mm
Midsole width - forefoot
126.9 mm

Midsole width - heel

The heel measurement surprised us. Coming in at just 90.8 mm, it’s narrower than it looks and feels!

This design choice is offset by an extremely wide midfoot—comparable to what we’d find in stability shoes. In our experience as neutral runners, the heel provided ample support, but we believe this shoe may not be the best choice for those with stability concerns plus a heel-striking technique.

Brooks Glycerin Max Midsole width - heel
Test results
Glycerin Max 90.8 mm
Average 90.7 mm
Compared to 366 running shoes
Number of shoes
73.0 mm
Midsole width - heel
106.6 mm

Flexibility / Stiffness

One of the main challenges with maximalist running shoes is the increased longitudinal stiffness from all that foam underfoot. This stiffness can make them less ideal for easy runs or just casual use as a sneaker.

Brooks Glycerin Max flex

In our 90-degree bend test, the Glycerin Max scored 32.9N, a decent outcome. While it’s not ultra-flexible, this is surprisingly good for a shoe with over 40 mm in the heel. We think this level of flexibility, combined with the absence of a stabilizing plate, makes it suitable for everyday wear in many cases.

Test results
Glycerin Max 32.9N
Average 28.2N
We use an average of four tests. The video shows one of those tests.
Compared to 348 running shoes
Number of shoes
2.2N
Flexibility <> Stiffness
72.1N

Weight

In our view, the Glycerin Max’s weight is one of its weakest aspects. While we concede that it boasts generous cushioning underfoot and a plush, ultra-padded upper, we think 10.8 oz feels slightly excessive for a premium-priced shoe.

This weight, however, isn’t a deal-breaker for daily training runs, especially if comfort is your priority. But for speed work or fast-paced work, we found that the shoe’s bulk becomes noticeable. It feels heavy, it looks heavy, and on our scale, it absolutely is.

Brooks Glycerin Max Weight
Test results
Glycerin Max 10.76 oz (305g)
Average 9.38 oz (266g)
Compared to 366 running shoes
Number of shoes
5.61 oz (159g)
Weight
12.59 oz (357g)

Breathability

Brooks took its time entering the maximalist running shoe market, but its debut in the maximalist category comes with an outstanding upper on the first try.

The engineered mesh offers a blissful blend of comfort and ventilation. Made from three layers, we initially worried it might trap heat, but our tests with the smoke machine confirmed superb ventilation in the toebox area. 

Using a LED flashlight, we found that airflow is primarily concentrated in the toebox, while side areas are reinforced to handle lateral forces—a smart choice given the towering stack height.

Brooks Glycerin Max micro

The toebox’s large ventilation holes are crafted with impressive precision. Examining them up close with a microscope, we saw the meticulous design that ensures maximum breathability.

Brooks Glycerin Max microscope 2

The engineered mesh is also notably stretchy, enhancing both comfort and spaciousness.

In our experience, the luxurious padding in the tongue and heel, though perhaps a bit excessive, combines with the airy mesh to make this one of the best uppers we’ve seen in the game.

Test results
Glycerin Max 5
Average 3.8
Compared to 295 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Breathability
5

Durability

Toebox durability

A premium upper should excel in both ventilation and durability, so we put the Glycerin Max to the test with our Dremel.

After testing, we found a solid 3/5 durability rating, which we believe is impressive for such a comfort-focused upper. This result is possible due to the triple-layer construction we observed earlier.

Brooks Glycerin Max Toebox durability
Test results
Glycerin Max 3
Average 2.5
Compared to 229 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Toebox durability
5

Heel padding durability

The heel area impressed us with tons of padding, not bad for a feature that often raises durability concerns here in the lab.

However, in our tests, we found that Brooks excelled here by incorporating a protective lining that reinforces the heel. This smart design achieved a strong 4 out of 5 durability rating—a truly solid score in our view.

Brooks Glycerin Max Heel padding durability
Test results
Glycerin Max 4
Average 3.2
Compared to 225 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel padding durability
5

Outsole hardness

To understand Brooks’ choice of a softer rubber (69.0 HC) in the outsole, we need to consider its unique design.

The outsole has a significant amount of exposed foam and relatively limited rubber coverage, making a grippy compound essential due to the reduced ground contact points. In simpler terms—less rubber touching the ground demands higher traction from what’s there.

Brooks Glycerin Max outsole
Brooks even stripped down the rubber on the heel pods to shave off extra grams!

Why did Brooks opt for this minimalist approach? From our perspective, it’s all about weight savings. The shoe already carries substantial heft, so full-contact outsole wasn’t an option. 

Brooks Glycerin Max Outsole hardness
Test results
Glycerin Max 69.0 HC
Average 80.1 HC
We use an average of four tests. The photo shows one of those tests.
Compared to 346 running shoes
Number of shoes
60.3 HC
Outsole hardness
93.0 HC

Outsole durability

When it comes to outsole durability, the Glycerin Max definitely raised eyebrows in the lab. As we showed before, there's minimal rubber covering the midsole, and that could be an issue.

After testing with the Dremel, we found a 1.2 mm dent, which, to be honest, left us a bit uneasy. In most shoes, we’d say, “Oh, it’s fine!” but with so little rubber touching the ground here, we hoped for a bit more resilience.

Brooks Glycerin Max Outsole durability
Test results
Glycerin Max 1.2 mm
Average 1.0 mm
Compared to 207 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.0 mm
Outsole wear
2.0 mm

Outsole thickness

Fortunately, we measured a 3.1 mm thickness, which helps offset the limited rubber coverage and should provide adequate durability. However, don’t expect this outsole to last forever—it leans more toward the opposite!

Brooks Glycerin Max Outsole thickness
Test results
Glycerin Max 3.1 mm
Average 3.2 mm
Compared to 365 running shoes
Number of shoes
1.0 mm
Outsole thickness
6.0 mm

Misc

Price

Maximalist training shoes are hovering around the $200 range, and that’s exactly where the Glycerin Max lands. We know it’s a substantial investment for a trainer, but you’re getting a serious amount of foam underfoot. And given recent market trends, if maximal cushioning is what you’re after, it’s going to come with a maximal price tag.

Brooks Glycerin Max side view

But we think that Brooks could enhance some Glycerin Max’s features to match its cost, like its weight. Still, for marathoners seeking a recovery or long-run shoe that saves the legs for the next session, it’s a solid choice.

Test results
Glycerin Max $200
Average $145
Compared to 366 running shoes
Number of shoes
$60
Price
$285

Reflective elements

We were delighted to find reflective elements incorporated into the Glycerin Max—an excellent addition, especially considering Brooks has left this feature out of other recent top-tier trainers like the Ghost Max 2.

Test results
Glycerin Max Yes

Tongue padding

While the 14.0 mm single-slab foam cushioning provides outstanding comfort, we found the tongue to be a major letdown. Despite its pillow-like thickness and loop, it still shifts around noticeably, which it's again unacceptable in a $200 shoe.

Brooks Glycerin Max tongue

We believe that a simpler 8 or 9 mm tongue would’ve delivered sufficient comfort without the extra bulk. This would have allowed space for a gusset, effectively securing it to the midsole and delivering a much better fit.

Brooks Glycerin Max Tongue padding
Test results
Glycerin Max 14.0 mm
Average 5.8 mm
Compared to 363 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.5 mm
Tongue padding
14.2 mm

Tongue: gusset type

Our first disappointment with the tongue emerged right off the bat—it isn’t fixed to the sides! In our view, this oversight falls far below expectations for a shoe positioned as Brooks' premium trainer.

Brooks Glycerin Max Tongue: gusset type
Test results
Glycerin Max None

Heel tab

Brooks makes some unconventional choices, and one of the quirkiest is their tendency to skip finger-loop heel tabs in training shoes, only adding them to competition models like the Hyperion Elite 4

However, the Glycerin Max features an extended, easy-grab heel collar that makes slipping your foot inside a breeze.

Brooks Glycerin Max Heel tab
Test results
Glycerin Max Extended heel collar

Removable insole

The insole is removable, as it’s not glued to the last. However, it’s not a typical design—it features a flared heel for a sink-in feel, which may slightly reduce stability if you choose to replace it.

Brooks Glycerin Max Removable insole
Test results
Glycerin Max Yes