Customer Reviews Brooks Glycerin 19

These shoes hit me too high in the back of the foot. I could not run in them due to pain in my Achilles tendon and the blisters the back of the shoe caused. I didn't like the mesh forefoot. I prefer my Glycerin 14s which offer more support and aren't so high in the back. These were unwearable.

I've had two pair of these prior to this pair and loved them. The top of the heel is hard and pinches and digs into the back of my foot creating blisters as I walk. Even with high socks this happens. :-( So disappointed in these!

Pain it was supposed to address still present, gives heal blisters, no arch support

DO NOT BUY THESE SHOES!! I was so excited to get a new pair of Brooks Glycerin shoes since I put over 1500 road running miles on my Brooks Glycerin 18s. I got massive blisters on my heels on the first run in these and figured I just had to break them in (even though I never had this issue with past Glycerins and got the same size as before) - after letting my heels heal and 7 more runs, just as painful as ever-like getting stabbed in the achilles. I am so disappointed! I thought I found a great style but looks like the new versions are not for me.

Returned. I am always a 6.5 in brooks. Have purchased many different styles. This pair was too short my toes were smushed to the top. Buy a half size up. Returned for my fav ghost pair.

This is not at all what my previous experience was wearing Glycerin. This shoe is uncomfortable and fits smaller than your regular running size. The mesh in the front is not at all what Glycerin used to be. A really negative experience with this shoe, it?s sad.

Awful. They give me blisters and there's something hard that hits the back of my ankle that runs it raw. Would not recommend. I wish I could return but I'm past the 90 day mark.

I have ran in Brooks Glycerin for over 10 years and this was the first pair to disappoint. I?m not sure what they have changed but these are the most uncomfortable shoes I?ve ever ran in.

I ordered the same shoe for both my daughter and I. We have worn the Glycerin before. Gave awful blisters on the heal first time out and just walking. We returned both sets of shoes. Do not recommend this model/year.

I returned them right away it was like stepping on broken boards , very disappointed have several pairs always LOVED them

I wanted to love the new shoes however they made one foot numb, pinching around the Achilles and the fist day of wearing them I had a major flair of planter fasciitis with the worst pains. I haven?t had problems w that in years!

Well, disappointing actually. I usually wear the Ghost but tried this model?too snug for running or power walking. Cute but not for training.

I have purchased many pairs of glycerin 19 size 7 and the first day you wear them they were so comfortable. I have recommended this style. However the last pair I ordered are sized like a 6.5 they are too small. I kept trying to wear them to see if a break in period would result. No the are too small. I was shocked. I loved that I could depend on this brand but alas all good things come to an end.

Very uncomfortable compared to my go to Ghost 11,12 &13.

Runs smaller than the other brooks I?ve bought, can?t wear them.

I've been wearing some version of the Glycerin style for at least the last 10 years and I have loved every model except for the Glycerin 19. Something is off with the front sole of the shoe, it seems like there is no cushion compared to past versions. I can get about 1 mile in before the balls of my feet are killing me and my toes start to go numb. I've never had this problem with any of the previous versions of this shoe. I've tried breaking them in for the past 2 months but I feel pain every time I wear these shoes, so unfortunately, they'll need to be returned.

These give me blisters on my feet if I wear them longer than a mile. Really disappointed.

I was so excited about these shoes because they had so much cushioning and I love brooks ghost. They arrived and I put them on only to find that even in a wide size they were far more narrow than ghost in wide. This one?s a miss.