ShoeGeometry

ASICS GlideRide Max 2 vs New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15

Two popular shoes in the same category, compared on measured geometry. Each cell carries a provenance badge; open a shoe for sources.

heel boneASICS GlideRide Max 2: heel 46 mm, forefoot 40 mm (drop 6 mm); toe rocker 36 % of length, radius 42 % of length; heel bevel 9 % of length, 18 mm high at the back, ending behind the heel bone (only the back edge is rounded).ASICS GlideRide Max 2: toe rocker 36 % of lengthNew Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15: heel 38 mm, forefoot 32 mm (drop 6 mm); toe rocker 31 % of length, radius 48 % of length; heel bevel 11 % of length, 18 mm high at the back, ending about under the heel bone.New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15: toe rocker 31 % of length
  • ASICS GlideRide Max 246/40 mm · toe rocker 36 % · heel bevel 9 %
  • New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v1538/32 mm · toe rocker 31 % · heel bevel 11 %
Illustrative profiles, not photographs: drawn from published stack heights and photo estimates of the unloaded shoes on a common length (300 mm), heels aligned, toe to the left; dots mark where each toe rocker starts; the dotted vertical line is under the heel bone (12 % of length), so a heel curve reaching past it is a bevel in front of the heel bone. Dotted lines use typical values where a shoe has no measurement. Exact values are in the table below.

Which suits you

If you wantPickBecause
A smoother roll at toe-offASICS GlideRide Max 236.3 vs 31.5 % toe rocker
More cushioning under the heelASICS GlideRide Max 246 vs 38 mm heel stack
More under the forefootASICS GlideRide Max 240 vs 32 mm forefoot stack
A lower dropAbout the same6 vs 6 mm drop
A stiffer, snappier forefootASICS GlideRide Max 250 vs 37 /100 stiffness
A firmer, more stable feelASICS GlideRide Max 247 vs 3 /100 firmness
A wider base under the forefootASICS GlideRide Max 2115 vs 108.9 mm forefoot base

From the values below, with differences inside measurement noise shown as about the same. This describes the shoes, not what is right for your feet; comfort in the first few runs decides.

MetricASICS GlideRide Max 2
Max cushion · Road
New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15
Max cushion · Road
Heel-to-toe drop6 mmStated6 mmDerived
Heel stack46 mmStated38 mmMeasured
Forefoot stack40 mmStated32 mmMeasured
Weight261 gStated261 gStated
Toe rocker36 %est.31 %est.
Rocker radius42 %est.48 %est.
Rocker rise angle32 degest.28 degest.
Rocker angle at toe67 degest.53 degest.
Toe tip over ground47 mm*est.36 mm*est.
Visible rocker lift onset74 %est.76.6 %est.
Toe spring (relative)22.8 %est.16.8 %est.
Heel bevel length9 %*est.10.9 %*est.
Heel bevel height18 mm*est.18 mm*est.
Midsole width (forefoot)115 mmMeasured108.9 mmMeasured
Midsole width (heel)93.5 mmMeasured91.4 mmMeasured
Toe box shape79 %est.—
Interior forefoot width96.1 mmMeasured94.8 mmMeasured
Toebox width72.6 mmMeasured73.2 mmMeasured
Longitudinal stiffness50Derived37Derived
Midsole firmness47Derived3Derived
PlatePlate unknownNo plate
Primary foamFF Blast+Infinion (supercritical TPEE/EVA blend)
List price$170$170

Key differences

  • Heel-to-toe drop is about the same: 6 mm for ASICS GlideRide Max 2, 6 mm for New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15.
  • ASICS GlideRide Max 2's heel stack is 46 mm, 8 mm thicker than New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15's 38 mm.
  • ASICS GlideRide Max 2's forefoot stack is 40 mm, 8 mm thicker than New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15's 32 mm.
  • Weight is about the same: 261 g for ASICS GlideRide Max 2, 261 g for New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15.
  • ASICS GlideRide Max 2's toe rocker is 36 % of length, 5 % of length longer than New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15's 31 % of length.

Read more about both shoes

We measure the shape. For how they feel over many miles, and for lab tests of cushioning, grip and fit:

ASICS GlideRide Max 2

New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15

Independent sites; we are not affiliated with them.

ASICS GlideRide Max 2 details · New Balance Fresh Foam X 1080v15 details · Add more shoes