Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24  Running Shoe Review

Reviewed Dec 17, 2025 at 08:47am
Test bench update Apr 29, 2026 at 09:00pm
Tested using Methodology v0.10 
Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24

Track

5.4
Marathon Racing 
5.8
5K/10K Racing 
3.8
Energy Return 
5.7
Cushioning 
7.7
Lateral Stability 
9.4
True To Size 

Track

 0
Notice: This running shoes was replaced by Brooks Adrenaline GTS 25
  1. Recommended in:
  2. Most Comfortable

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

5.4
Marathon Racing 
5.8
5K/10K Racing 
3.8
Energy Return 
5.7
Cushioning 
7.7
Lateral Stability 
9.4
True To Size 
  • 5.4
    Marathon Racing
  • 5.8
    5K/10K Racing

  • Performance Usages

  • 3.8
    Energy Return
  • 5.7
    Cushioning
  • 7.7
    Lateral Stability
  • 9.4
    True To Size
  • Changelog

    1.  Updated Apr 29, 2026: We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.10, adding a new set of fit tests to the Design section and an overall fit performance usage. Check out the details in our changelog.
    2.  Updated Apr 13, 2026: We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.9, which adds a Forefoot Long Run Cushioning test to our performance section. Read more in our changelog.
    3.  Updated Dec 17, 2025: Review published.
    4.  Updated Dec 15, 2025: Early access published.

    Popular Running Shoe Comparisons

    Brooks Ghost 17

    Track

    The Brooks Ghost 17 and Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24 are two of the brand's flagship daily trainers, with the former more suited to runners with a neutral stride, and the latter designed to provide stability to runners with pronation issues. The Adrenaline does so through raised sidewalls that keep your foot from rolling side to side. It's a bit firmer and less cushy than the Ghost, and it has a more pronounced heel-to-toe drop. The Ghost, while not a dedicated stability shoe, still has a very solid platform that provides good lateral stability, so runners who don't have pronation issues can run in it with confidence.

    Brooks Glycerin 22

    Track

    The Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24 and Brooks Glycerin 22 are both daily trainers, but they’re built around different priorities. The Adrenaline GTS 24 is the dedicated stability shoe, with a broad support-focused platform, firmer forefoot, and guide-rail-style support that gives it a more controlled feel underfoot. The Glycerin 22 is the more cushioned, comfort-first option, with better heel and forefoot protection, a roomier fit, and slightly more rebound overall. Neither shoe feels especially snappy, but the Glycerin 22 is the better pick for a softer, more comfortable daily trainer for running or walking. The Adrenaline GTS 24 is the one to reach for if you need structured support to help with overpronation.

    Brooks Revel 8

    Track

    The Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24 and Brooks Revel 8 may both be daily trainers, but they are for very different runners. The Adrenaline GTS is the classic stability option, fitted with GuideRails to help overpronators keep their foot centered, along with a broader platform and higher stack. The Revel 8 is a more value-oriented offering, good for beginners and short, easy runs or walking, though it lacks the pep and cushioning, so runners wanting a premium shoe without GuideRails are best served elsewhere in the Brooks lineup.

    How We Test Running Shoes
    How We Test Running Shoes

    We buy and test 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 so team members can log in miles. This real-world testing is conducted at various paces and conditions, across 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
    4.8
    Weight
    Weight
    289.3 g (10.21 oz)
    Stack Heights
    Heel Stack Height
    40.9 mm
    Forefoot Stack Height
    27.4 mm
    Heel-To-Toe Drop
    13.5 mm
    Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
    12.0 mm
    External Shape
    Outsole Heel Width
    93 mm (3.7")
    Outsole Arch Width
    77 mm (3.0")
    Outsole Forefoot Width
    109 mm (4.3")
    Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio
    2.27
    Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio
    3.98
    Internal Shape
    Internal Length
    280 mm (11.0")
    Internal Heel Width
    65 mm (2.6")
    Internal Forefoot Width
    90 mm (3.5")
    Wide Sizing Available
    Yes
    8.8
    Forefoot Fit: Width
    Ball-Of-Foot TTS Deviation
    4.7 mm (0.185")
    Toe TTS Deviation
    2.0 mm (0.080")
    4.8
    Forefoot Fit: Height
    Toe TTS Deviation
    -6.1 mm (-0.240")
    10
    Arch Fit: Width
    Arch Width TTS Deviation
    0.4 mm (0.017")
    10
    Length Fit
    Other Features
    Tongue Gusset Type
    Non-gusseted
    Plate
    None
    Performance
    1.7
    Heel Energy Return
    Heel Energy Return
    67.2%
    4.7
    Forefoot Energy Return
    Forefoot Energy Return
    71.4%
    6.4
    Heel Cushioning
    Energy Absorbed At 550N
    2.40 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1100N
    8.01 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1900N
    15.83 J
    5.0
    Forefoot Cushioning
    Energy Absorbed At 800N
    3.04 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1300N
    5.42 J
    Energy Absorbed At 2050N
    8.29 J
    5.6
    Heel Firmness
    Firmness At 550N
    66.9 N/mm
    Firmness At 1100N
    102.8 N/mm
    Firmness At 1900N
    182.7 N/mm
    9.0
    Forefoot Firmness
    Firmness At 800N
    158.6 N/mm
    Firmness At 1300N
    301.7 N/mm
    Firmness At 2050N
    520.0 N/mm
    4.6
    Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
    Energy Absorbed At 10km
    5.12 J
    Energy Absorbed At 20km
    4.98 J
    Energy Absorbed At 30km
    4.90 J
    Energy Absorbed At 40km
    4.83 J