Customer Reviews Brooks Glycerin Max

I really loved the feel of these, but they're the only shoes that ever gave me arch blisters. I tried giving them a little time to break in but it never got better. It seems to be a semi-common problem from what I've read. If they could fix that for the next iteration I'd buy them in a heartbeat.

I wanted to love this shoe but unfortunately had to return it after 23 miles and three runs. My first run was an 8 mile, zones 2 and 3, on my treadmill for 70 minutes. I began feeling hotspots on the inside arches of both feet. My left foot ended up being a thin long blister about 1.5 inches. I covered it up for my speed session the next day without bother on different shoes. I did a 3 mile zone 2 the next day and no issues. My next run was a 2 hour run over rolling hills just shy of 10:00 minutes/mile. The blisters came back but this time with a vengeance along the same spot. I have 7 other pairs of running shoes for different types of training and have no issues with them. These just didn't work for me.

Unfortunately not for me. Have to return the sneakers. 6"3 around 200 lbs. got blisters around mile 2.5 every run.

Great for walking as they are comfortable but running in them was a different experience. My small toe could not take the pain when running more than 5 minutes.

Unfortunately, these shoes do not work well with my feet/legs. I've been running around 2000 miles for the last couple years and when I worked these shoes into the rotation I started having shin splints.

As a serious runner I've been a loyal fan of the Brooks Glycerin for years. Naturally, I was eager to test out the Glycerin Max, particularly after hearing about the increased cushioning. The moment I laced them up, the plushness underfoot was undeniablean improvement even over the already well-cushioned standard StealthFit models. However, after a week of running in them, my excitement began to wane. The substantial stack height, while initially comfortable, proved problematic during actual runs. The midsole felt overly bulky, and the added height significantly compromised stability. I constantly had to focus on maintaining precise form to avoid the sensation of teetering or stumbling. For runners with a midfoot or forefoot strike, this lack of stability can be particularly frustrating, especially at higher paces. I hoped that with more mileage I might adapt to the design, but the instability persisted. While the Glycerin Max excels in comfortmaking it a great option for walking or recovery daysit simply doesn't deliver the performance or control needed for serious running. Compared to the standard Glycerins, which strike a near-perfect balance between cushioning and responsiveness, the Max feels more like an attempt to chase trends in the maximalist shoe market rather than a purposeful upgrade for runners. Brooks appears to be competing with other brands in the race for ever-increasing stack heights, but there's a point where excessive cushioning becomes counterproductive for serious athletes. While the Glycerin Max might suit recreational runners who prioritize comfort over performance, it doesn't hold up for those of us seeking a reliable, stable, and performance-oriented ride. For dedicated runners, the standard Glycerin remains the superior choice.

These sneakers look cool with a bunch of squish, but may not be for everyone. They were a bit too squishy rendering them highly unstable. It was like walking in a bounce house. I have wide-ish feet, but these were too loose throughout the mid section and toe box. There was an odd rubbing along my arch/mid foot. Heel slippage was another problem. Perhaps a new version can remedy some of these issues. Look to the Ghost Max 2 if you prefer a good daily running shoe with cushion, rocker, and fit.

I've been a loyal Glycerin wearer since the G10 series. I run an average of 4-6 miles per day and 1,000 - 1,300 miles per year, depending upon what races in which I'm planning to participate. I usually burn through two to three pairs of Glycerins per year. Despite the above, I'm not in perfect shape. I'm 5'7" and weigh about 197lbs. I hit the pavement hard, but the Glycerin series has historically offered me excellent support and comfort. I was excited to try the Max, as it seemed to offer a dramatic improvement in cushion. While this was the case to some extent, the downside issues ultimately led me to return the shoes after about 42 miles of wear. Here are my observations: 1. The Max have a much more shallow rise than the typical Glycerin series. This ultimately hurt me. I wound up spraining my right calf muscle and had much pain in both calves after every run. I could not figure out why until I saw the difference in rise. I think reg Glycerin Classic rise is 10 and the Max is 6. My running gate is just not compatible with this shallow rise. It caused too much stress on my calves thereby creating pain and sprain. 2. The upper is way less cushioned than the classic Glycerin. In fact the tongue actually cut into my ankle and caused some chaffing and discomfort. Personally, I think the upper wears like a far cheaper shoe than the Glycerin brand to which I've been accustomed for so many years. 3. The toe box is really wide. I think the Max runs large compared to the classic Glycerin. Perhaps it may run a half size larger. I usually wear a 12, but I was swimming in these and could have been better suited with an 11.5. The above said, I really did love the extra spring in my step that the Max provided. If the above issues can be addressed in future iterations of the Max, I'd love to try again. For now, I'm going back to the Classic Glycerin series and just placed my advanced order for the G22's

I'm a fan of the Glycerin 21 shoes, but whenever I run in them, I wish for just a little more midsole cushion. So, you can imagine my excitement when I heard about the new Glycerin Max. Sadly, I will be returning these shoes after a few runs. The biggest issue for me is that the arch support extends a little too far forward. It's been a long time since a new shoe has given me blisters, and this is the first time that I got a blister, and pain, on my arch - right below the pad of my foot and at the outer edge of the bottom of my foot. That being said, I think the Max has a lot of potential and I'd consider trying the next version if two more adjustments are made. The first is the shape of the rocker. I'm primarily a heel striker, and I struggled with the heel to toe transition with this shoe. I don't think it's the midsole drop as I've run in other 6mm drop shoes with no problem. The Max seems to respond to forefoot striking - you can feel the shoe propelling you forward. The second adjustment would be to the breathability of the upper. These shoes feel warm while currently running in high-70's temperatures. With warmer months ahead, I wouldn't be looking forward to running in these shoes. Still, I'm happy that Brooks introduced a max version of the Glycerin line and will look forward to the release of the GM2.

I actually love the run feel, it's a great shoe for training, tempo, and especially easy miles. Unfortunately, anything beyond 3 miles ends up giving me nasty blisters in my arches. I'd hoped this was a break in issue as my first go was a 10 mile run walk, but it's been persistent on 4 follow on runs beyond say 4 miles. I fear it's too late to return them, so they've been relegated to strictly 3 mile training runs.

I bought the shoe because i have been enjoying my previous high stacked cushioning shoes because they have been treating me well. With Brooks' advertisement for the Glycerin Max, i had high hopes for it. My running shoe size according many different brands are normal width and size 11. size 11 on the glycerin max fits just right. It was very cloud like cushioning for walking but as soon as i started running, the shoe felt heavy and lacks energy return and responsiveness. I do between 8-9min/mile. I also don't feel much of that cushioning when running. It felt firm to me. So i returned the shoes. It is an excellent shoe for walking but for that price, i had high expectations.

I really wanted to love this shoe and was so excited when I received it. It was announced literally as I was in a store considered some max cushioned, non-plated shoes. I've always had issues with some of these because I generally don't care for very soft shoes. I thought the dual density approach with a firmer, more responsive forefoot would be exactly what I had been after. But after a week of running in them, logging about 30-35 miles, I have to say that they're really not for me. The heel is very, very soft in my opinion. To the point where I don't care for the transition and toe off because I feel like the shoe is trying to get me to land closer to the heel to take advantage of the cushioning. But the heel is so soft with no supporting element like a plate that I feel like I'm sinking into them causing some of the most excruciating knee post-run knee pain I've felt in years. I've worn them on a variety of runs and haven't found a pace that works for me in them. But the midsole isn't the real problem for me. After the Hyperion Max 2, which is maybe the best upper of the year or in a few years, I'm bummed/confused by the upper on the Glycerin Max. It might be one of the hottest, most ill-fitting uppers I've worn- to the point where if I hadn't ordered directly from Brooks would have thought they were a knockoff or defected/seconded item. After a week with them, I have more blisters on my feet than any shoe other than the Alphafly 2 (which turned my feet into Swiss cheese). The length is spot-on, but the toe box volume is so big that my feet move around in them no matter how they're tied, causing blisters on my big and small toes on both feet. Additionally, my last run in them created huge blisters on my instep/arch. And even with the blisters, the toe isn't even my least favorite part of the upper. The area around the ankle and heel is so thick and absorbent that I thought again that it was a fake. That area of the shoe is literally 2.5-3x thicker than that on the Hoka Skyward X, a shoe I consider pretty plush. This cushioning is not only unnecessary, but also creates massive problems in warmer weather. I wore them for a 14 mile long run on Sunday in the mid-70s (yes, it's still too hot in Texas) and that area of the shoe was still very wet on Tuesday morning. Maybe it's a manufacturing issue as the shoe scales up in size (mine is a mens 12) because I purchased a pair for my daughter as well (womens 8) and it doesn't seem nearly as comically thick and absorbent. Again, I desperately wanted to love this shoe- on paper it sounded like exactly what I was looking for. But the pain from the softness of the foam (and I'm not a big person who compresses the foam a whole lot) to the many issues caused by the upper, I think my quest continues. I'll give it one more run before I more than likely send back to Brooks.

Too narrow that it hurt the sides of my feet

The shoes is Very Good Thank You

I've had these shoes one month. They are supposed to be premium shoes, yet they do not hold up to actually being run in. Very comfortable, but the bottoms of the shoe are falling apart.

I received bad shin splints wearing these shoes, and actually had to stop running. I've since returned the shoes, but this wasn't it.

I've had a horrible experience thus far, the cushioning is not durable and my feet were hurting a lot after the tenth mile I ran in them. I will never buy another pair of brooks!

These caused terrible blisters in my arches. It's a shame too, because they are the softest most comfortable shoes I've ever worn. No shoe has ever given me arch blisters but these. :(

Worst brooks I have ever tried. I wear a size 9.5 and they felt like clown shoes. The effortless transition mentioned is non existent, every step absorbed all my energy and just how silly I looked my soul as well. The inflated sole is just ugly. I returned them. I did try them for one run to see if there was something good about them. I think they would make good walking shoes when I'm old. I'll try them again in 30 years.

Worst shoe I've ever purchased. It's like having a tugboat on your feet.