As was the theme with a lot of shoes at TRE this year, major change wasn’t in the forefront. The Glycerin Max 2 exemplifies this with the only change coming to the upper. Well, that and a slight resculpting of the midsole foam for aesthetic purposes. As a spoiler for the review, if you really liked the original Glycerin Max, you’ll really like this. If the Glycerin Max wasn’t to your tastes, then this won’t be either.
Upper and Fit of the Brooks Glycerin Max 2
What works for me
The previous version of the shoe became a favourite daily walk around shoe for me, I found that the soft comfort of the heel and plush upper made it a great shoe for being on foot for hours. In fact, I preferred it as a walking shoe to a running shoe. Especially once I had worn it in and reduced the slippage and hotspots. As the upper is the biggest change between the v1 and v2, we should probably have a look to see what has changed.
There is a definite difference in the ventilation pattern between the v1 and v2. The second version is more breathable thanks to this. The large score marks on the lateral side of the upper allow for more airflow. Meanwhile, the tongue remains massive. It could probably be used in place of a mattress on a camping trip if you wanted to keep packing down to a minimum.
The material is still soft and pleasant to the touch and there are no hotspots or areas of rubbing, but there is a change in volume. More of this below. The lack of hotspots in the second version is a real bonus as I had issues with some of those in my experience in the original version.
Overall, plushness remains the keyword with padding galore and the foot held in a Rolls Royce-esque over-engineered luxury. As far as softness and comfort is concerned, it is an all day shoe.
What doesn’t work for me
There does seem to have been a change in the volume of the upper. After my first couple of runs, I actually went to see if this version of the Glycerin Max had been sent to me in a smaller size than the previous version. Apparently, both are the same size. However, there is a noticeably smaller toebox this time out. On the run, my toes do feel more compacted than they did in the v1. Sadly, this limits the time I can spend running in the v2. For a shoe designed for longer running, this is sub-optimal. They’ve got rid of hotspots by smushing my toes, apparently.
This could be a problem for wider footed runners too as Brooks currently lists the Glycerin Max 2 as available only in a 1D medium width sizing.
Secondly, and it is a minor gripe, while the Glycerin 23 has a lovely elastic heel tab to pull on the shoe, this is lacking in the Glycerin Max. I know this is not a real performance changer but it is a little oversight which makes the shoe just a touch less user friendly.
Midsole and Ride of the Brooks Glycerin Max 2
What works for me
The midsole, aesthetics aside, has the same composition and feel as the previous version. Therefore, if you are a heel striker, you’ll get the most of the cushioning available. The shoe is stacked at the rear with the big cell section of the DNA Tuned foam. For those who are more forefoot in their strike, you will land on the small cell section which is firmer and there to give some pop to toe off. While this isn’t an unpleasant landing zone, you aren’t really getting the full experience of the shoe.
The ride is cushioned and comfortable. The width of the platform and the relative density of the DNA Tuned foam make it quite a stable feeling ride despite the towering stack. Despite my issues with the upper, the midsole is a well made piece of engineering which can be enjoyed by a range of runners although it is probably better suited to those who are on the larger side or those who have very strong legs.
It is certainly possible to push the pace in them, I have used them for strides and some faster (mainly downhill) efforts. Still, the foam doesn’t feel that lively. It isn’t a shoe which directly competes against other super trainers out there. I still prefer it at more sedate paces in my running. Powerful and heavier runners may get more out of the ride than my low ground contact, high cadence style.
What doesn’t work for me
The ride is a matter of taste of course, but I find it to be a little stiff and clunky. The 7mm of extra foam in this than the Glycerin 23 don’t seem to make it more comfortable, they just add weight and bulk. Added to this, there isn’t a huge feeling of energy return in the Glycerin Max 2. While this isn’t an issue for those who are looking for an easy cruiser or soft day recovery shoe, it does limit the versatility of the Glycerin Max 2.
When combined with the weight, the lack of energy return means that it won’t be a single shoe rotation. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to pick this for a speedier session on the streets.
Outsole of the Brooks Glycerin Max 2
Grip and Traction
With a slightly redesigned grip pattern, I have had no issues with the traction on the Glycerin Max 2. This is probably helped by the fact that I am never moving particularly quickly in the shoe. That said, I can only judge the shoe on how it has performed on the streets and I can give no complaints about what I have found.
Even during the recent frost and torrential rain, the only issue I have encountered was on sheets of sheer ice but I can’t think of many road shoes which would have performed better in the circumstances.
Durability
I expect the durability to be excellent. My pair of the v1 must be close to 4 figures of kilometres walking and running by now and they are still going strong. As the v2 is almost identical in construction and design to the original, I can’t foresee any issues. Despite the gaps in outsole rubber, the DNA Tuned foam seems pretty resistant to damage with the exception of a couple of nicks where I have managed to step on something particularly sharp.
Conclusion
Value for Money
At $200 these are no small purchase. While the comfort and durability are excellent and they are definitely built to last the test of time, the lack of versatility is a downside when comparing to other shoes at a similar price. If you have money to spend and are after a very luxurious easy mile shoe, this could very well be the choice for you. On the other hand, if you are looking for something with more versatility for similar money, it is probably worth checking out the Vomero Plus, ASICS Megablast
Fitting it into a shoe rotation
The lack of versatility with the Glycerin Max 2 probably limits where it would be useful in a shoe rotation. This is compounded for me by the lower volume toe box. For me, it will sit in the realm of middle distance, easy running. The kind of shoe I will put on for a morning run when I want something comfortable and don’t care about the pace of the run. It soaks up the road without giving too much back. The weight precludes it from being a faster shoe, at 320g, it is a real heavyweight.
Final Verdict
This is a tough shoe for me to give a solid verdict on. The plus sides are the quality and durability. However, I do think that the price and the lack of versatility brought on by the weight and low volume toe box limit the running I will get out of it. When I compare it to the Glycerin 23, I can’t think why I would spend the extra money for the Glycerin Max 2. While it is not a bad shoe, for my running style and preferences, it just doesn’t make it to the top of the heap. I know that other testers in the team have a much more positive opinion on it.
Comparisons Against Similar Shoes
Brooks Glycerin Max 2 vs. Brooks Glycerin Max
While there isn’t a vas difference between the two shoes, the newer version with its seemingly lower volume toe box loses out in the comfort stakes. That said, if you enjoyed the ride of the first version, you will like this one too.
Brooks Glycerin Max 2 vs. Brooks Glycerin 23
This one is a win for the Glycerin 23 for me. I have run a similar amount of mileage in both shoes and just prefer the ride of the Glycerin 23. While it isn’t a nimble speedster, it feels less stiff and smoother than the Glycerin Max 2 for me. Landing at the forefoot, I don’t feel a huge difference in the cushioning level. Finally, the Glycerin Max 2 seems to have a lower volume toe box which restricts the length of time I can spend in it.
Brooks Glycerin Max 2 vs. Nike Vomero Plus
The roomier toe box on the Vomero Plus makes this a win for the Nike shoe. Furthermore, the midsole offers a bit more to the majority of runners that the Glycerin Max 2. However, the durability of the Glycerin Max 2 will probably outshine that of the Vomero Plus over the longer term. The DNA Tuned foam can handle a ton of volume while the Vomero Plus is starting to show a little flattening after about 350 miles.
