Brooks Cascadia 18 VS Saucony Peregrine 15

If you’re looking for a reliable all-mountain trail shoe around the $140 mark (that’s very reasonable by the way), two clear contenders stand out: the Brooks Cascadia 18 (links to review) and the Saucony Peregrine 15 (links to review).

I’ve worn both on mountain trails near my home and found plenty to like about each of them. In this Brooks Cascadia 18 VS Saucony Peregrine 15 showdown I’ve compared their key specs, highs, and lows, plus my final verdict on which shoe might be the better fit for your running style and terrain.

Key specifications (Cascadia 18 VS Peregrine 15 comparison table)

What’s good

Brooks Cascadia 18

• Secure fit and balanced cushioning: The Cascadia 18 continues Brooks’ tradition of making shoes that feel stable on rugged ground. The DNA Loft v2 midsole offers a good mix of comfort and responsiveness.
• Slightly lighter than its predecessor: Coming in a bit lighter than the Cascadia 17, it still provides protective features like a Trail Adapt rock plate and reinforced toe cap.
• Great traction: The TrailTack outsole grips well on rocky paths and doesn’t slip in wet conditions. I appreciate how it performs reliably across different surfaces and also on climbs/descents.

Saucony Peregrine 15

• Excellent traction with 5mm lugs: The PWRTRAC rubber grabs onto loose or muddy trails too. These shoes inspire confidence on climbs and descents in much the same way as the Cascadias.
• Comfortable cushioning: PWRRUN foam, paired with a PWRRUN+ sockliner, strikes a great balance between shock absorption and ground feel. I also like the slightly softer ride compared to similar trail shoes.
• Low drop for better control: With a 4mm drop, the Peregrine 15 gives a grounded feel that helps me react faster to uneven surfaces. While this lower drop gives you better control that the Cascadia’s 8mm drop, you do have to work your calves more on the climbs.

What’s not so good

Brooks Cascadia 18

• Heavier side of the spectrum: Although lighter than the previous version, it’s still not the lightest all-mountain option out there. Some runners looking for an ultra-light sensation may find these too heavy.

Saucony Peregrine 15

• No rock plate: You don’t get a rigid plate for propulsion or added underfoot protection like you do in the Cascadia 18. Some might prefer the extra firmness of a rock plate, especially on gnarlier terrain.
• Slight adjustment if you’re used to higher drops: The 4mm drop may take time to adapt to if you’ve been wearing shoes with a higher heel-to-toe offset.

My final verdict

Both shoes perform well on a mix of terrain, from forest trails to rocky scrambles. The Brooks Cascadia 18 suits runners looking for an 8mm drop and a bit more cushion underfoot, which can be beneficial for those who frequently tackle longer runs. The addition of a rock plate also helps with stability on technical sections, protection from sharp rocks, and forward propulsion.

The Saucony Peregrine 15 works best for those who appreciate a lower 4mm drop, enjoy a slightly softer landing, and want aggressive grip with 5mm lugs. It offers a flexible feel that adapts well to uneven ground, making it a good choice for runners who value quick reactions when stepping over roots or rocks. Runners with a medium-width foot who like a slightly wider toe box, and prefer a closer-to-the-ground experience will feel right at home.

If you’re still unsure which shoe to pick, take a look at my all-mountain trail shoe roundup. You’ll find alternatives that might fit your exact foot shape and running style, plus a few extra insights to help you land on the perfect pair for you.

At the end of the day, finding the right shoe is all about what feels good on your feet and supports your running requirements best.

➡ Enjoy this comparison? Subscribe to my newsletter and Youtube Channel, for more authentic, honest, and reliable running shoe reviews just like this one.