November 20, 2015 8:16 PM MST - Subscription purchasing, account maintenance, forum profile maintenance, new account registration, and forum posting have been disabled
as we prepare our databases for the final migration to our new server next week. Stay tuned here for more details.
Subscribe Contribute Advertise Facebook Twitter Instagram Forums Newsletter
A brief negative review of the Brooks PureDrift
Display Avatars Sort By:
Max Dilthey
(mdilthey) - M

A brief negative review of the Brooks PureDrift on 01/29/2013 13:58:58 MST Print View

I loved my Brooks PureConnect. When it came time to upgrade, I chose the Brooks PureDrift and returned them five minutes later.

#1: The fit is not great. The upper of the shoe has no tongue. Instead, the side panel wraps around and the asymmetrical lacing pulls it to the side of your foot. Every pair of "classic" shoes I've owned fit better than these. These felt like an awkwardly overlapping ankle brace. I didn't like it at all. The tongue on the Brooks PureConnect was very well designed, with a microfiber material and a set of bungee cords that made for a great fit. These shoes had none of those good qualities.

#2: the materials and craftsmanship looks less than half as good as my Brooks PureConnect. Rather than have a tough synthetic outer like the Connects, they have a soft meshy outer and it just screams cheap material. The sole looks significantly less durable.

#3: The color is awful. The yellow is the cheapest, most highlighter-esque greenish yellow available. Fine for visibility, but I've seen visible shoes that were not this ugly. They look ok online, and very cheesy in real life.

I wanted to like these shoes. At 10-12oz a pair, they were great weight and they looked alright online, but in person, they did not live up to their $100 price tag or their ancestors heritage.

The new shoe hunt continues...

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
There is a dedicated gear review forum... on 01/29/2013 14:35:05 MST Print View

Why not post stuff like this in the "Reader Gear Reviews" forum?

Max Dilthey
(mdilthey) - M

Not enough info. on 01/29/2013 14:42:41 MST Print View

Because I didn't take them out in the field.

b willi jones
(mrjones) - F

Locale: NZ,,, best place in the world !?
Re: Not enough info. on 01/30/2013 01:14:07 MST Print View

you seemed to have enough info to write this negative report

Ken T.
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: All up in there
A brief negative review on 01/30/2013 06:36:06 MST Print View

I'm amazed that you even made the purchase. This thread is pretty useless. Hopefully it will be a quick death. Perfect troll habitat.

Richard Reno
(scubahhh) - M

Locale: White Mountains, mostly.
Why didn't you just buy another pair of Connects? on 01/30/2013 07:01:02 MST Print View

It sounds like you thought they were pretty good; or were they only good in comparison to the ones you returned within five minutes?

I'm thinking about getting a pair for summer day hikes in new England, BUT... I'm concerned about the durability of the split sole in the front: it just looks like it might fall apart within the first hundred yards or so.

any thoughts?

What did/will yu end up with?

Max Dilthey
(mdilthey) - M

Relax, everyone. on 01/30/2013 09:18:38 MST Print View

My intention was not to do a full review of the shoe. however, I have a good eye for quality and usability, and the fact that this shoe failed that quick to my discretion means it's likely one you want to think hard about before ordering. When a shoe looks THAT flimsy and feels THAT uncomfortable out of the box compared to so many other shoes, it's a big red flag.

If you want, I can just keep quiet and never share my opinion ;) If you don't like what I have to say about the shoe, buy one and review it. Otherwise, relax; I'm just sharing my perspective.

A shoe that gets sent back in 5 minutes is definitely alarming enough to me to warrant mention, since I usually test shoes over weeks before deciding whether I like them or not. This is also a brand new product, one that A) Hasn't got a lot of reviews behind it, period, and B) hasn't had the chance to be edited or re-engineered by Brooks to fix any issues.

No choice made on a replacement yet.

Edited by mdilthey on 01/30/2013 09:22:02 MST.

Max Dilthey
(mdilthey) - M

@ Rick on 01/30/2013 09:20:11 MST Print View

Rick, the Pure Connects were very well made. I do reccomend them and I would get another pair, but I think I want something a little more minimalist.

I did not have any durability issues at all aside from the color on the sole disappearing pretty quick (silver paint).

Edited by mdilthey on 01/30/2013 09:20:56 MST.

Nico .
(NickB) - MLife

Locale: Los Padres National Forest
Brooks Pure Project on 01/30/2013 09:34:31 MST Print View

fwiw, all of the new Pure Project shoes (2.0) this year have the new "bootie" design rather than a traditional tongue. I for one, like it, as it fits my feet better and keeps the tongue in place (a chronic problem for me with running shoes, even when they have a tongue strap). The rest of the shoe seems to be in keeping with the previous version more or less.

I wear the Pure Flows for my road running and gym workouts and the Pure Grits for trail running.

Different strokes for different folks.

Max Dilthey
(mdilthey) - M

Thanks Nico on 01/30/2013 10:18:57 MST Print View

I'll try one of those. Any thoughts on the PureDrift?

Ben Smith

Locale: Epping Forest
@Max on 01/30/2013 10:48:00 MST Print View

Have you tried inov8's? :)

I live in my f-lite 195s!

Max Dilthey
(mdilthey) - M

Inov-8 on 01/30/2013 10:54:07 MST Print View

I live in my Inov-* Bare-X shoes, but I wouldn't dream of taking them on the trail- no absorption at all for stray rocks and a grip that can only be described as "suicidal." I still love them for around-town use and the durability is fantastic. I might look into Inov-8, but my traction concerns and my wide foot might hold me back from the 195's specifically.

Ben Smith

Locale: Epping Forest
inov8 bare-x on 01/30/2013 10:56:23 MST Print View

I recently got a pair of the 150's and they're delicious! Ran in them last night and a tiny bit of mud on the pavement send me face first into the ground. Definitely agree they aren't a trail shoe.

You should head to a stockist and try a load of different sizes in everything they've got. It's fun if nothing else. I found that inov8 size a little differently to other trail runner brands such as merrel and salomon.

Doug I.
(idester) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Inov-8 on 01/30/2013 11:00:51 MST Print View

Max, see: and

Eugene Smith
(Eugeneius) - MLife

Locale: Nuevo Mexico
Re: Brooks Pure Project on 01/30/2013 11:01:52 MST Print View


As with anything, particularly footwear in this case, the differences of opinion will run the gamut. Proceed cautiously when throwing out general criticisms in regard to gear, especially those not backed by any significant time of use or credibility. People respect the opinion of others here, no question, but delivery and intent can go a long way.

Out of curiosity, what did you intend to do with the shoe? Backpack? Hike? I've seen some harsh reviews on footwear not intended for backpacking, here at BPL. That can be a pointless pursuit.

Ben Smith

Locale: Epping Forest
negative reviews of shoes on 01/30/2013 11:09:08 MST Print View

" The specified forum thread no longer exists or never existed. "

I think some of the negative reviews for trail runners are fair because even though they might not be designed solely for backpacking a lot of people do swear by them so why not be critical of them.

Travis Leanna
(T.L.) - MLife

Locale: Wisconsin
Re: Re: Brooks Pure Project on 01/30/2013 11:10:56 MST Print View

"Proceed cautiously when throwing out general criticisms in regard to gear, especially those not backed by any significant time of use or credibility. People respect the opinion of others here, no question, but delivery and intent can go a long way."

I think this is precisely why people were ruffled with the OP.

Max Dilthey
(mdilthey) - M

The "perfect" shoe. on 01/30/2013 11:13:18 MST Print View

I only run once a week or so, but when I hike it's often for several days. I'm trying to find a comfortable shoe I can do non-technical hikes in that will still provide enough support to pound pavement about 10 miles a week.

Because the Brooks pure project shoes have deep recesses, they do okay in mud, and the tough rubber outsoles are grippy enough to handle wet rocks, etc. I knew this coming from the Pure Connects. However, that molded tongue on the PureDrift just didn't work for me. maybe my feet have high tops? I couldn't say, but I was definitely not a fan of the fit. I might try my luck with one other Pure Project 2 shoe just to confirm if it's not going to work for me at all. I was surprised by how poorly the PureDrifts fit, but more so, in the perceived durability. I would be very interested to see how one holds up after extended use; it really did look that flimsy to me. For $60, I might find out for myself. For $100, I want to see the quality, and I find that in almost every other shoe in the line.

Two things I'm learning here:

#1. I am personally always looking for more information on things, even if that information is imperfect. So, I try to "give back" by reviewing a lot of my stuff, especially when it stands out in the gamut of things I try as particularly bad or good. If I can do someone else a favor, I try to.

#2. A shoe that can do both of these things likely does not exist. I will need to compromise on one end of the spectrum between trail traction and road cushioning.

I will say this:
This is the first time I've ever written a review where people actually got upset with me for writing it... A review is personal, by nature. You can't really tell me I'm wrong, since it's personal, and the idea that theres some standard of quality in reviews is a little dubious to me... I've seen a lot worse and I find it easy to disregard what is not useful to me. I suggest you guys adopt a similar filter before you go harassing people who willfully offer their help.

Max Dilthey
(mdilthey) - M

I should not have said "Review" on 01/30/2013 11:18:03 MST Print View

People were ruffled because "brief review" still has the word "review" in it. What I should have said was, my initial opinion is that this shoe is of less quality than other Brooks Pure Project shoes, and I had a difficult time with the new fit. Both of those are potentially very useful observations to people debating on being a guinea pig to a brand new shoe line.

So, bottom line, I guess I'm not wanted here! (sarcasm)

spelt with a t
(spelt) - F

Locale: SW/C PA
Re: I should not have said "Review" on 01/30/2013 12:02:47 MST Print View

A phrase I see a lot on the Gear forum is "Initial impressions." Probably a less provocative choice!