If you’re looking for premium stability shoes from Asics, the Asics Gel-Kayano 31 and the Asics GT-2000 13 are top contenders. However, despite being part of Asics’ stability range, these two shoes cater to different needs and feel quite different on your feet. Whether walking, running, or standing all day, choosing the right shoe for your specific activity is important.
In this review, we’ll break down the key differences between the Asics Gel-Kayano 31 and the Asics GT-2000 13, focusing on cushioning, stability, and overall fit to help you decide which model best suits you.
Cushioning: Plush vs. Snappy
The Asics Gel-Kayano 31 offers more cushioning compared to the GT-2000 13.
The Gel-Kayano 31 features:
- 40mm of cushioning in the rearfoot
- 30mm of cushioning in the forefoot
In contrast, the GT-2000 13 has:
- 36mm of cushioning in the rearfoot
- 28mm in the forefoot
This gives the Gel-Kayano 31 a 10mm heel drop, while the GT-2000 13 has an 8mm drop. The key difference is how each shoe feels:
- The Gel-Kayano 31 provides a plush, cloud-like cushioning that feels soft and padded as you apply pressure, making it ideal for long walks or standing for extended periods.
- The GT-2000 13 is firmer and snappier, offering more bounce-back, which is great for faster-paced walks or uptempo runs.
Stability: 4D Guidance System vs. 3D Guidance System
Both shoes have solid stability features, but the systems are slightly different.
- The Asics Gel-Kayano 31 uses a 4D Guidance System, which incorporates resilient cushioning to control pronation and keep your foot centred during your stride. The lateral sole flare on the outside helps prevent your foot from rolling out too far, making it one of Asics’ most stable shoes.
- The Asics GT-2000 13 uses a 3D Guidance System, providing moderate stability. While the base is wide and supportive, the firmer cushioning doesn’t require as many stability features, making it a lighter and more dynamic option for quicker movements.
Upper and Fit: Comfort and Space
The upper design and fit are also different between these two models:
- The Gel-Kayano 31 has a plush, sock-like upper that provides comfort for longer wear. The fit is slightly more snug but offers enough room for toe splay. This shoe also features a padded tongue.
- The GT-2000 13 has a tapered toe box and a slightly less voluminous upper than the Gel-Kayano 31. The fit is more similar to a racing shoe—snug and streamlined—but still comfortable. It also has a thin, gusseted tongue.
Both shoes come in normal, wide, and extra wide options, so even those with broader feet can find a fit that works for them.
Weight and Performance
Another major difference is the weight:
- The Gel-Kayano 31 weighs about 311g for a men’s size 9 US shoe, making it heavier. This extra weight provides more cushioning and comfort, perfect for long walks or standing for extended periods.
- The GT-2000 13 is lighter, weighing around 266g, making it more suitable for faster runs or uptempo workouts where a snappier, more responsive shoe is needed.
Which Shoe is Best for You?
- If you prefer plush cushioning and need more stability for long walks, standing, or long runs, the Asics Gel-Kayano 31 is the better choice. The additional weight is a trade-off for the comfort and stability it provides.
- If you’re looking for a lighter, more responsive shoe that still offers good stability, the Asics GT-2000 13 is ideal. Its snappier feel makes it perfect for faster-paced runs or shorter walks.
Conclusion
The Asics Gel-Kayano 31 and the Asics GT-2000 13 are excellent stability shoes, but they cater to different activities and preferences. If you’re considering upgrading from the GT-2000 12 to the 13, the subtle changes could make a difference depending on how you use the shoe.
Please comment below if you have any questions about these shoes or are unsure which suits you. If you find this review helpful, please like and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more in-depth shoe reviews!
