Brooks Adrenaline GTS 23  Running Shoe Review

Reviewed Dec 15, 2025 at 03:18pm
Tested using Methodology v0.8.2 
Brooks Adrenaline GTS 23
4.3
Marathon Racing 
4.3
5K/10K Racing 
4.8
Energy Return 
1.2
Cushioning 
6.8
Lateral Stability 
 0

We've tested these running shoes to expand our database and allow users to compare results to help with their buying decisions. We don't expect to write a full review, but if you have any questions about this product, please let us know.

Our Verdict

4.3
Marathon Racing 
4.3
5K/10K Racing 
4.8
Energy Return 
1.2
Cushioning 
6.8
Lateral Stability 
  • 4.3
    Marathon Racing
  • 4.3
    5K/10K Racing

  • Performance Usages

  • 4.8
    Energy Return
  • 1.2
    Cushioning
  • 6.8
    Lateral Stability
  • Changelog

    1.  Updated Dec 15, 2025: Review published.
    2.  Updated Jul 10, 2025: Our testers have started testing this product.

    Popular Running Shoe Comparisons

    ASICS GEL-KAYANO 32

    The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 32 and the Brooks Adrenaline GTS 23 are both longstanding support trainers aimed at overpronators, but they offer very different ride experiences. The Adrenaline uses Brooks' GuideRails system for support, paired with a high-drop, traditional geometry that feels more structured through the heel but less adaptable overall. Its midsole is noticeably firmer and absorbs less impact, giving it a harsher feel. The ASICS, in contrast, delivers a softer and more protective ride with a smoother heel-to-toe transition thanks to its lower drop and added forefoot stack. It still offers plenty of support thanks to its 4D Guidance sidewalls.

    How We Test Running Shoes
    How We Test Running Shoes

    We've recently started buying and testing running shoes with a very data-oriented approach. While we're just getting started, our methodology already has dozens of tests to help you make the right purchasing decision for your needs. Not only do we use high-end equipment to gather objective data, but we also order multiple sizes of the same shoes for team members to be able to log in miles. This real-world testing is done at various paces and conditions, and with different types of workouts, to cover all the bases. This allows us to verify our results and ensure they align with what you might feel with a specific pair.

    Test Results

    perceptual testing image
    Sort:
    RATINGS
    Category:
    All
    Design
    5.1
    Weight
    Weight
    282.0 g (9.95 oz)
    Stack Heights
    Heel Stack Height
    36.4 mm
    Forefoot Stack Height
    23.6 mm
    Heel-To-Toe Drop
    12.8 mm
    Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
    12.0 mm
    External Shape
    Outsole Heel Width
    92 mm (3.6")
    Outsole Arch Width
    70 mm (2.8")
    Outsole Forefoot Width
    116 mm (4.6")
    Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio
    2.53
    Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio
    4.92
    Internal Shape
    Internal Length
    280 mm (11.0")
    Internal Heel Width
    66 mm (2.6")
    Internal Forefoot Width
    90 mm (3.5")
    Wide Sizing Available
    Yes
    Other Features
    Tongue Gusset Type
    Fully-gusseted
    Plate
    None
    Performance
    4.2
    Heel Energy Return
    See details on graph tool
    Heel Energy Return
    70.9%
    5.1
    Forefoot Energy Return
    See details on graph tool
    Forefoot Energy Return
    72.0%
    1.3
    Heel Cushioning
    See details on graph tool
    Energy Absorbed At 550N
    0.85 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1100N
    2.82 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1900N
    5.48 J
    1.1
    Forefoot Cushioning
    See details on graph tool
    Energy Absorbed At 800N
    0.60 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1300N
    1.76 J
    Energy Absorbed At 2050N
    3.09 J
    3.1
    Heel Firmness
    See details on graph tool
    Firmness At 550N
    49.9 N/mm
    Firmness At 1100N
    68.0 N/mm
    Firmness At 1900N
    86.7 N/mm
    4.6
    Forefoot Firmness
    See details on graph tool
    Firmness At 800N
    70.8 N/mm
    Firmness At 1300N
    116.4 N/mm
    Firmness At 2050N
    171.4 N/mm