Our verdict

We found the Glycerin Max 2 to be a true SUV for easy miles, built around massive interior comfort, generous cushioning, and a foot-hugging feel that still stays surprisingly ventilated. We really liked its solid traction, guided stability, and polished design. However, the high weight and low bounce were impossible to ignore. In our view, those drawbacks may feel like deal-breakers at this premium price point, especially for runners who want a lively, versatile daily trainer.

Pros

  • Massive cushioning for easy days
  • Rocker geometry helps smooth transitions
  • Incredible upper comfort
  • Solid traction
  • Plush foam
  • Breathable upper manages summer runs well
  • Very stable for its size
  • Good durability overall

Cons

  • High price
  • Disappointing energy return
  • Heavy build limits versatility
  • Non-gusseted tongue

Audience verdict

N/A
Not enough reviews yet

Who should buy

We tested the Brooks Glycerin Max 2 and found it ideal for:

  • Runners seeking maximum cushioning for relaxed daily miles.
  • Heavier runners wanting huge foam and premium upper comfort.
  • Heel strikers needing extra stability in a max-stack shoe.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2

Who should NOT buy

We think the Glycerin Max 2 may disappoint runners searching for a lighter and more versatile max-cushion trainer. In our lab tests and outdoor runs, the shoe felt noticeably bulky, and we believe alternatives like the Nike Vomero Plus or ASICS Novablast 5 offer a more smooth and agile experience while keeping a highly-cushioned ride.

We also found that the DNA Tuned foam lacks the lively bounce many runners expect at this premium price point. Shoes like the ASICS Superblast 3 or the Adidas Hyperboost Edge deliver a far more energetic and fast-feeling ride, especially when the pace starts increasing.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 parts

Cushioning

Shock absorption

We found a radically different shock absorption distribution in version 2 compared to the first-generation Glycerin Max. This time, the heel delivers slightly less cushioning at 137 SA, while the forefoot receives a massive upgrade with an impressive 128 SA.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Shock absorption heel
Heel
Forefoot
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 137 SA
Average 130 SA
Compared to 356 running shoes
Number of shoes
57 SA
Shock absorption
173 SA

Energy return

The DNA Tuned foam struggled once again in this test. In our lab measurements, we recorded just 49.1% energy return in the heel and 51.3% in the forefoot. That’s not especially surprising given that this is still an EVA-based compound, but for a shoe carrying a $200 MSRP, we believe these numbers should be higher.

In our view, a more energetic foam would make the shoe perform much better during long runs when the pace starts to increase.

Heel
Forefoot
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 48.0%
Average 58.5%
Compared to 353 running shoes
Number of shoes
38.0%
Energy return
83.0%

Heel stack

The Glycerin Max 2 may fall short in bounce, but it certainly doesn’t lack heel stack height. With a towering 45.4 mm measurement, it fully earns its place in the maximalist running shoe category and lives up to the Max name without question.

And based on our runs, this is clearly a shoe designed for runners who want maximum isolation from the ground and enjoy that extra-tall underfoot sensation that makes you feel a few centimeters taller.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Heel stack
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 45.4 mm
Average 35.2 mm
Compared to 528 running shoes
Number of shoes
22.5 mm
Heel stack
50.1 mm

Forefoot stack

The forefoot may be even more impressive when it comes to stack height, reaching a massive 37.3 mm. At the time of this review, that’s actually higher than our current lab average for heel stack height, helping create an ultra-cushioned ride in the front.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Forefoot stack
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 37.3 mm
Average 26.6 mm
Compared to 528 running shoes
Number of shoes
13.9 mm
Forefoot stack
38.5 mm

Drop

Brooks claims a 6 mm heel-to-toe drop, and our measurement came in a bit higher at 8.1 mm. It’s a small difference that doesn’t meaningfully change the ride, and we still believe the Glycerin Max 2 works well for all foot strike patterns.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Drop
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 8.1 mm
Average 8.6 mm
Compared to 528 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.1 mm
Drop
16.1 mm

Midsole softness

Updated
Note: Low measurement: softer. High measurement: firmer.

Comfort was clearly Brooks’ main priority with this shoe, and that likely explains why they chose a much softer formulation of DNA Tuned for this version.

At 30.9 AC, the foam feels noticeably softer than the first-generation model, which we measured at 39.9 AC using the same durometer. Therefore, runners who found version 1 slightly too firm should notice a major change in ride feel here.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Midsole softness
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 30.9 AC
Average 35.9 AC
Compared to 206 running shoes
Number of shoes
19.6 AC
Midsole softness (soft to firm)
54.0 AC

Secondary foam

Updated
Note: Low measurement: softer. High measurement: firmer.

The secondary section of DNA Tuned is the smaller foam piece located in the heel, and we measured it at 36.5 AC, making it slightly firmer to help improve stability.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 foam secondary

Test results
Glycerin Max 2 36.5 AC
Average 39.4 AC
Compared to 89 running shoes
Number of shoes
23.5 AC
Secondary foam (soft to firm)
64.0 AC

Rocker

Runners who enjoy a highly-rockered running experience will love the Brooks Glycerin Max 2.

The sole features an aggressive curvature in both the forefoot and heel, creating a strong forward-rolling sensation while helping offset the massive stiffness caused by the towering stack height.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Rocker

Size and fit

Size

Owners of this shoe, how does it fit?

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

Internal length

Note: Our testing shows that internal length is not a great measure of fit. But, as many users have requested this specific test, we've decided to add it for those interested.
Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Internal length
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 269.0 mm
Average 269.4 mm
Compared to 283 running shoes
Number of shoes
259.5 mm
Internal length
277.6 mm

Width / Fit

Brooks usually offers multiple width options in its daily trainers, although that’s not the case for this premium model. The Glycerin Max 2 only comes in a standard width, so we were especially curious to see how the fit turned out.

With a measured width of 96.5 mm, it feels slightly roomier than the average running shoe, which gives it a solid starting point for accommodating most foot shapes comfortably.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Width / Fit
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 96.5 mm
Average 95.2 mm
Compared to 303 running shoes
Number of shoes
88.5 mm
Width / Fit
101.4 mm

Toebox width

We also avoided an overly tight toebox here, measuring 73.4 mm in width. It’s not the roomiest design we’ve tested, but it should comfortably work for most runners.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Toebox width
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 73.4 mm
Average 73.2 mm
Compared to 303 running shoes
Number of shoes
65.9 mm
Toebox width
82.6 mm

Toebox height

One area where we noticed some potential for pressure was the upper above the toes.

With only 24.0 mm of toebox height, runners who prefer extra vertical room to freely wiggle their toes may experience a somewhat restrictive fit.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Toebox height
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 24.0 mm
Average 27.0 mm
Compared to 303 running shoes
Number of shoes
22.0 mm
Toebox height
33.9 mm

Traction / Grip

Traction test

Traction is one area where a premium-priced shoe needs to perform at least above average, and Brooks managed to achieve that here. While the 0.61 result is not especially remarkable, it still delivers solid grip, including on wet surfaces, and we see that as a genuinely positive outcome.

Test results
Glycerin Max 2 0.61
Average 0.51
Compared to 347 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.11
Forefoot traction
0.89

Outsole design

The outsole uses a mostly exposed foam layout with strategically placed rubber coverage in key impact and toe-off zones. However, we were quite surprised to find such limited rubber coverage considering the notably high weight of the shoe.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Outsole design

Flexibility / Stiffness

If there’s one thing the Brooks Glycerin Max 2 clearly delivers, it’s stiffness. Our test measured a massive 21.9N, reinforcing the trend we’ve observed in recent years with max-stack shoes, where midsole height often influences stiffness more than the presence of a carbon plate.

Because of that, you should not expect any meaningful flexibility here. In fact, the Glycerin Max 2 feels like the complete opposite of a flexible shoe.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Flexibility / Stiffness
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 21.9N
Average 15.5N
Compared to 350 running shoes
Number of shoes
3.9N
Flexibility <> Stiffness
28.5N

Weight

We’ve already mentioned how heavy this shoe feels, and for good reason. Even before placing it on our scale, we could immediately tell this was not a lightweight design. At 11.2 oz or 318g, it comes in even heavier than version 1.

In our view, the next Glycerin Max needs to lose at least 10% of its weight to become more versatile and noticeably more appealing for daily training.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Weight
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 11.2 oz (318g)
Average 9.3 oz (264g)
Compared to 529 running shoes
Number of shoes
5.3 oz (149g)
Weight
12.9 oz (366g)

Breathability

We were slightly surprised by the upper because Brooks has recently delivered some truly impressive knit-based designs, whereas this one feels more conventional with its classic engineered mesh construction.

Still, it performs well overall. With a strong 4/5 ventilation score in our lab tests, the Glycerin Max 2 should handle warm-weather runs without any real issues.

Using our light test, we quickly understood the logic behind the design. The upper includes heavy reinforcement to better control lateral movement, yet Brooks still managed to maintain solid airflow throughout the shoe, as shown in our video.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 microscope

Under the microscope, the material quality looked good, although we wouldn’t call it especially remarkable considering the premium price of the Glycerin Max 2.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 mesh

However, the padding tells a completely different story. Brooks went absolutely overboard here, adding two enormous foam pillows around the heel collar to create one of the most plush and exaggerated step-in feels available today.

Test results
Glycerin Max 2 4
Average 3.6
Compared to 476 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Breathability
5

Stability

Lateral stability test

The Brooks Glycerin Max 2 is an extremely tall shoe, which may immediately make some runners worry about stability. However, just like we’re seeing with many modern maximalist trainers, brands are doing so many stability-focused design choices that these shoes can actually work quite well for runners with mild support needs.

It may sound counterintuitive, but that’s exactly how the current max-stack trend is evolving.

Torsional rigidity

Updated

Torsional rigidity is also extremely high, just like longitudinal stiffness. We measured a massive 19.6 Nm result here, which was fully expected given the shoe’s towering and heavily-rockered design.

Twisting the shoe is basically impossible, so it won’t naturally follow foot movements while running, although this ultra-rigid setup also helps add a noticeable layer of stability.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Torsional rigidity
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 19.6 Nm
Average 14.6 Nm
Compared to 94 running shoes
Number of shoes
7.8 Nm
Torsional rigidity
22.5 Nm

Heel counter stiffness

Brooks also chose an ultra-stiff heel counter that we rated at 5/5, once again aiming to increase stability around the heel area.

To offset that rigidity, the brand added a generous amount of foam padding so the rearfoot doesn’t feel uncomfortable. Even so, as we mentioned earlier, the heel structure barely flexes alongside your foot and ends up feeling incredibly rock-solid on the run.

Test results
Glycerin Max 2 5
Average 3
Compared to 501 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel counter stiffness
5

Midsole width - forefoot

The midsole also sits well above our current lab average, reaching a massive 119.0 mm in forefoot width.

During our runs, midfoot and forefoot landings consistently felt controlled and guided, although runners who prefer a freer and less structured ride may find this setup too artificial.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Midsole width - forefoot
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 119.0 mm
Average 114.6 mm
Compared to 529 running shoes
Number of shoes
102.2 mm
Midsole width - forefoot
127.9 mm

Midsole width - heel

The same applies to the heel, which measures a broad 97.0 mm and feels even more guided due to the ultra-stiff heel counter design.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Midsole width - heel
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 97.0 mm
Average 90.9 mm
Compared to 529 running shoes
Number of shoes
70.8 mm
Midsole width - heel
106.6 mm

Durability

Toebox durability

The toebox of the Glycerin Max 2 surpassed our lab average with a solid 3/5 durability score. That’s a positive and reassuring result when paying this much for a shoe.

Test results
Glycerin Max 2 3
Average 2.6
Compared to 411 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Toebox durability
5

Heel padding durability

We found similar results in the heel padding, which earned a strong 4/5 durability score. Another positive outcome for the Glycerin Max 2.

Test results
Glycerin Max 2 4
Average 3.4
Compared to 405 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel padding durability
5

Outsole durability

We found a solid result for outsole durability with a wear depth of 1.1 mm. It’s not exceptionally good, but it’s reassuring enough to avoid major long-term concerns.

Test results
Glycerin Max 2 1.1 mm
Average 1.1 mm
Compared to 389 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.0 mm
Outsole wear
2.0 mm

Outsole thickness

Brooks also played it safe here by using a fairly thick 3.5 mm outsole. However, we need to consider that rubber coverage is somewhat limited, meaning the existing rubber sections must absorb more overall wear and stress.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 rubber

From that perspective, the extra thickness makes sense and it's fine. But another possible approach would have been reducing exposed foam and using a more extensive rubber layout instead...

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Outsole thickness
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 3.5 mm
Average 3.2 mm
Compared to 525 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.5 mm
Outsole thickness
6.1 mm

Misc

Insole thickness

The Glycerin Max 2 comes with an insole that’s average rather than maxed-out, measuring 4.7 mm in thickness.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Insole thickness
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 4.7 mm
Average 4.4 mm
Compared to 522 running shoes
Number of shoes
1.5 mm
Insole thickness
7.8 mm

Removable insole

You can remove the insole and maybe swap it for a thicker one if you want an even more cushioned experience.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Removable insole
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 Yes

Midsole softness in cold (%)

DNA Tuned still relies on an EVA-based compound... and as we often see with EVA foams, cold weather becomes a weak point.

After spending 20 minutes in our freezer, the midsole lost 22% of its softness.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Midsole softness in cold (%)
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 22%
Average 23%
Compared to 472 running shoes
Number of shoes
0%
Midsole softness in cold
63%

Reflective elements

The Glycerin Max 2 reuses the reflective elements from the Glycerin Flex, and honestly, we think that was a smart decision.

Test results
Glycerin Max 2 Yes

Tongue padding

One thing Brooks clearly aimed for with this design was maximum comfort, and that’s exactly what you notice the moment you put the shoes on for the first time.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 tongue

The main reason is the ridiculously thick tongue. At 13.0 mm, it’s one of the most substantial designs we’ve ever measured, and it feels incredibly plush on foot. However, it also adds extra weight and pushes the comfort-first approach to an extreme, making this a very niche design that won’t appeal to everyone.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Tongue padding
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 13.0 mm
Average 5.7 mm
Compared to 527 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.4 mm
Tongue padding
14.2 mm

Tongue: gusset type

The tongue is not gusseted, which feels difficult to justify at this premium price point. Sure, it stays securely in place thanks to its massive thickness, but even then, we don’t think this is the ideal setup.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Tongue: gusset type
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 None

Heel tab

The Glycerin Max 2 features a very distinctive heel collar that sits fairly low around the heel before rising upward to protect the Achilles tendon.

Brooks Glycerin Max 2 Heel tab
Test results
Glycerin Max 2 None

Price

The only real way to justify the high price of the Glycerin Max 2 is by prioritizing maximum comfort above everything else. In that regard, it excels thanks to its ultra-plush upper and incredible step-in feel. However, for most runners, we think it falls short in overall performance, especially when compared to nearly every major rival in this premium category.

Test results
Glycerin Max 2 $200
Average $155
Compared to 529 running shoes
Number of shoes
$60
Price
$300