I was looking for high quality shoes that had a lot of cushion and room in the toe box. I would be using them primarily for walking around town and jogging on a treadmill. I have flat feel and pronate but didn't want a support shoe because the arch and rigidity is not comfortable for me. I prefer to use an arch support sock or arch wrap.I narrowed my choices to the New Balance 1080v9 (NB) vs Brooks Glycerin16 (Brooks) and tried them both. While looking at reviews, many people noted the Brooks ran narrow so I purchased that shoe in wide to accommodate the bunions I earned during my stiletto days. I found them to be very similar in fit. I wear 8.5 and they both ran true in length but the NB regular width felt as wide as the Brooks wide. The NB also looked a bit wider when wearing one of each side by side but that may be because of the pastel vs dark color. The NB in light cashmere is a very pretty muted pink color. The Brooks black/pink online photos show it as a medium pink accent but it's more of a deep fuschia/magenta.There were three fit/feel differences that I noticed. In the NB, my heel slipped up with every step, even with a runners loop. I don't have heel slip in the Brooks. While the cushioning in stepping down on both heels is exceptional, it seemed where the Brooks was pure cushion, the NB had a bit of a cupping feel when bottoming out. It may be a good thing but I wondered if over long distance and wear that might become uncomfortable. Finally, the Brooks has a one piece sock-like smooth interior that makes wearing it barefoot, or with a toeless sock, just a bit more comfortable.If not for the heel slippage, it would have been tough to decide a clear winner. I may have gone for the NB for looks but ended up with the Brooks for the fit. I don't usually leave such lengthy reviews but when I searched for a comparison of these two shoes there weren't any so I thought this might help someone.