Comments: I like the Ravenna 5 much more than the 4. The Ravenna 4 was too soft and thick in the forefoot, so much so that it was a chore during turns and made ankles prone to rolling. These are a bit lower and more stiff, but still softer and cushier than the Adrenaline. Just right.
From: Alex, Fair Lawn, NJ, USA. April 6th 2015
Comments: I love this shoe, very responsive, very nice soft and bouncy ride, have done 150 km in them, still feels great. thinking about getting another pair..
From: Kristian. February 15th 2015
Comments: I've ran in these 3 times and I'm not very impressed so far. The Ravenna 4 felt much more comfortable right out of the box. The Ravenna 5 doesn't seem to have as much cushion in the forefoot area. These feel flatter and stiffer.
From: DT, KY, USA. November 10th 2014
Comments: I am a pretty avid half marathon and mud-run runner, and this is my 3rd model of the Ravenna line. I have run in these shoes for about 10 weeks now, and I must say that I like heavy support shoes (I describe Ravenna's as boat anchors, while I like), but these shoes are a downgrade. They are lighter than the last model, but they feel flimsy and just plain cheap. After a few weeks into my next half marathon training, the cushion is significantly decreased compared to my Ravenna 4's that have seen a half marathon along with the training, and multiple smaller runs over the past year. I know Brooks changed the material they used for their sole, but I think it is a move to decrease cost while still maintaining the price tag. I do like the color combos and the size seems true to past models. Overall, if I wasn't majority of the way through the training for my next half in November, I would risk sending these back and switching brands, or even wearing my old Ravenna's. I gave them a fair share of trial use to hopefully get used to them, but I am completely disappointed with Brooks. I won't be buying a Ravenna next time. Instead I plan on finding a new brand that will stay with the same quality over multiple models.
From: TW, Winston Salem, NC, USA. October 19th 2014
Comments:I like this shoe. The toebox is wider than the 4 and more in line with the 3. Version 4 gave me blisters on the medial side of my foot with runs longer than 6 miles. I run 11 miles in this shoe with no problem. It is a much better version than the 4 for me. I wear a size 9 dress shoe and need a size 10.5 in this shoe. I would highly recommend that you try on any shoe and walk around in them in the store before you buy them. In fact try on three or four different brands, they all fit differently. Also, just because you love one version of a shoe doesn't mean the newer version will fit or feel the same. I weigh 155 pounds. I also use after-market insoles for better arch support to prevent plantar fasciitis.
From: TK, Al. August 1st 2014
Comments: I absolutely love the new Rav. The new dna material is springier. Agree with JGG, it is firmer but offers lots of impact protection and I weigh 215. Not bulky, very fluid feel without being too flexible which the Ghost 6 feels like to me now that they removed the mid-foot shank. great arch support as well. fits like a glove, have no issues with the tongue. The red looks way awesome out in the sun. This shoe is better in every way possible, my new favorite go to trainer!
From: MK. July 17th 2014
Comments: The Brooks Ravenna 5 is great for runners with arches that collapse. The only issue is the short tounge on the shoe. Other than that, it is perfect for me. WARNING: Everybody is different, this shoe may not be for you.
From: John Doe. June 29th 2014
Comments: The fit of the Ravenna 5 is much improved over the 4th version. No top of the foot pain like I had with the Ravenna 4. And the shoe moves better with my feet. The cushioning feels a little more firm but more uniform with the blended DNA/mogo. The prior version at times was so soft that it felt like running on deflated tires. All in all an improvement.
From: JGG, Milwaukee, WI. 3/10/14
Comments: Shoes feel bulkier, stiffer, less cushioned , less flexible, what the heck were they thinking? Only progress with this model is that Brooks has FINALLY realized they should offer this in a EE width (which still feels narrow btw), but the stiffer, firmer ride of the new midsole seems to indicate Brooks has new intentions with this model. Personally, I was hoping they would have kept the great cushioned midsole of prior models, and simply offered it in wider widths, as they should have been all along (i.e. new balance 870)
From: tonygio, Bartlett, IL. 3/10/14
Comments: Loved the Ravenna 4 and disappointed with the new Ravenna 5's. The shoe tongue is shorter in length and makes the fit feel a bit too snug at the top. I'm also no fan of the material quality in these new shoes. The new shoes look cheap and is quite the departure from the quality material fit & finish from Brooks. It seems someone at Brooks and to compare the previous model with the new one side by side the material quality is quite obvious Brooks must have been budget strapped with the new model.
From: Wayne, Allen, TX, USA. 2/25/14