Comments: Really disappointed with this shoe, sloppy upper fit and still not enough traction, definitely not in the same league as the mix master and peregrine.
From: Matt, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa
Comments: Also hate to say these are disappointing. First ever blister on my heel and I can't run down steep techy stuff in them as it hits the same spot. They feel heavy compared to MT 110s. Biggest issue is that if I lace them up tight enough to hold my foot properly, my toes go numb so they have to be left a bit loose - hardly ideal for trail running.
From: Andrew, Durban, South Africa
Comments: I ran in the first model of PureGrit for many months and finished a trail marathon in them. Although the traction was not real great, I liked many features of the shoe. After switching the insole for the Peregrine insole I liked it even better and the shoe had more room in the forefoot. I bought the 2nd model and ran 40 miles in them. I twisted my ankle once and thought it was maybe a fluke. I twisted my ankle again and then turned my knee on a 12 mile run. The best I can explain it is the front of the shoe feels heavy and the concave outsole feels clumsy. Why not a flat outsole? Also the upper is way too stiff for my liking and I don't feel like my foot could flex like it needs to. I couldn't tell where midfoot was which was a great benefit of the first model. I returned the shoes after being injured for more than a week and am now in PT. All I can say is that I think this shoe might be fine for flat ground but the concave sole actually leads to less stability on most single track. In my opinion, this feature is a potentially harmful gimmick. It was almost like my forefoot was slapping the ground and I felt like I was running in clown shoes. Hopefully the 3rd model will be a marriage of the good features from the first two. Brooks seems to be experimenting with outsole designs a little too much. A good outsole does not have to be revolutionary, it just has to work.
From: Kelly, Asheville, NC, USA