Brooks Glycerin 16 vs. Brooks Ravenna 9 review

Brooks Glycerin 16 is a premium cushioning shoe that delivers a soft and smooth ride. Brooks Ravenna 9 provides comfort and a responsive ride to moderate overpronators...

The Brooks Glycerin 16 and the Brooks Ravenna 9 fall in two different categories of running shoes, with the Brooks Glycerin 16 being a neutral cushioning running shoe and the Brooks Ravenna 9 a stability running shoe.

ADVERTISEMENTS

The uppers of the Brooks Glycerin 16 The preceding link takes you to Amazon.com and the Brooks Ravenna 9 are similar in that both come with a forefoot that is wide open and free from overlays, so both can provide lots of room to runners who have wide feet or big bunions.

While the Brooks Ravenna 9 The preceding link takes you to Amazon.com remains open for a large part of its midfoot, the Brooks Glycerin 16 comes with no-sew overlays to provide some support around the midfoot.

It isn't until you reach the back of the Brooks Ravenna 9 that it has some no-sew overlays that pull the top of the saddle towards the bottom of the heel.

Both the Brooks Glycerin 16 and the Brooks Ravenna 9 expose quite a bit of mesh at the back so deliver a standard amount of support in that area.

All in all, both the Brooks Glycerin 16 and the Brooks Ravenna 9 are geared towards delivering comfort through their uppers, with the Brooks Glycerin 16 having some support around the midfoot and the Brooks Ravenna 9 more towards the back of the running shoe.

The midsoles of the Brooks Ravenna 9 and the Brooks Glycerin 16 differ in construction and materials used.

While the Brooks Ravenna 9 uses Brooks' standard midsole material that is meant to deliver enough cushioning to keep you comfortable but still deliver responsiveness, the Brooks Glycerin 16 makes use of Brooks' latest midsole material that is meant to deliver lots of cushioning.

Therefore, by looking at the midsole material alone, the Brooks Glycerin 16 should feel softer under your foot than the Brooks Ravenna 9.

The Brooks Ravenna 9 has a somewhat thinner midsole under the forefoot compared to the Brooks Glycerin 16, and it also sits a bit lower on the ground under the heel compared to the Brooks Glycerin 16.

These again are reasons why the Brooks Ravenna 9 would deliver less heel and forefoot cushioning than the Brooks Glycerin 16.

Lab tests have found that the Brooks Ravenna 9 delivers an average amount of forefoot cushioning, which should make the Brooks Ravenna 9 feel very responsive, but the forefoot could also feel somewhat firm to some runners.

On the other hand, it delivers lots of heel cushioning to men, but women get a more moderate amount of heel cushioning.

The Brooks Glycerin 16 has been found to be very cushy in both the heel and the forefoot and for both men and women.

Therefore, according to lab tests, the Brooks Glycerin 16 is a much cushier running shoe from which you can get an overall very soft ride compared to the ride you would get from the Brooks Ravenna 9.

The midsole of the Brooks Glycerin 16 is well segmented and has a structure that the midsole of the Brooks Ravenna 9 does not have. This makes it serve well as a crash pad.

It also provides a good amount of ground contact, which should increase the stability of the running shoe.

However, the stability delivered by the Brooks Glycerin 16 cannot compete with the stability and support delivered by the midsole of the Brooks Ravenna 9, which has a post on the medial side to control pronation and help stop your feet from rolling too far inward.

This post is located under the heel and does not run all the way up to the foot, so the amount of pronation control would be more on the moderate side, but still, the Brooks Ravenna 9 scores high on the stability scale of lab tests.

The rubber outsoles of the Brooks Glycerin 16 and the Brooks Ravenna 9 are set up slightly different.

The Brooks Glycerin 16 tends to have an outsole that displays lots of separation and different zones that are meant to distribute pressure.

Therefore, the way the outsole of the Brooks Glycerin 16 has been set up would benefit helping you get a smoother ride.

The outsole of the Brooks Ravenna 9 has more rubber directly under the midfoot where it has rubber in the form of an X to deliver faster heel-to-toe transitions.

It has a little crash section under the heel that is well segmented but shorter than the crash section under the Brooks Glycerin 16.

The Brooks Ravenna 9 has a good amount of flex grooves in its forefoot, but they do not all run from side to side.

However, because the Brooks Ravenna 9 delivers an average amount of forefoot cushioning, it turns out to be a moderately flexible running shoe as opposed to the Brooks Glycerin 16, which delivers lots of forefoot cushioning and turns out to be a stiff running shoe for both men and women.

The Brooks Ravenna 9 is lighter than the Brooks Glycerin 16 for both men and women.

The Brooks Glycerin 16 and the Brooks Ravenna 9 are not really comparable running shoes, because they were created for two different types of runners.

If you are a neutral runner, the Brooks Glycerin 16 would be the one to consider, and if you are a moderate overpronator, the Brooks Ravenna 9 was made with your needs in mind.

The Brooks Glycerin 16 is all about getting lots of comfort and an ultra-soft ride as a neutral runner, while the Brooks Ravenna 9 has been kept light and responsive to help you go faster while still getting enough stability and support as an overpronator.

Note: The weight of a running shoe depends on the size of the running shoe, so any weights mentioned in this review may differ from the weight of the running shoe you choose to wear. Running shoes of the same size were compared for this review.

The two links above will take you to Amazon.com where you can read more about the running shoes.


This review falls under: Brooks

Disclaimer: This running shoe review on www.motioncontrolrunningshoe.org is based on personal research and analysis of data that has been made publicly available by running shoe manufacturers and other companies that are dedicated to serving runners, and is not claimed to be accurate, complete, or up to date. While the information presented in this review is intended to help you better understand the differences between running shoes, we shall not be held liable for any purchasing decisions you make based on this information. Please use your own good judgment before making a purchase. The owner of this website receives a small compensation whenever you buy a product after clicking a product link on this website. Read our full disclaimer and privacy policy.