Welcome to Flawless Shoe Reviews. Today we’re comparing two of the most popular ASICS shoes on the market: the Gel Nimbus 27 and the Gel Kayano 32. While both models are designed for comfort and performance, they feel very different underfoot and cater to different needs—especially when it comes to stability and use case.
Let’s break down their key differences so you can decide which one is right for your feet.
Midsole & Cushioning: Soft vs. Plush
The Gel Nimbus 27 features the updated FF Blast+ Eco cushioning, which offers more bounce and responsiveness compared to the Nimbus 26. It provides 43.5mm of cushioning in the heel and 35.5mm in the forefoot, creating an 8mm drop. Despite the generous stack height, it maintains a responsive ride, ideal for easy runs, long distances, or standing all day.
Meanwhile, the Gel Kayano 32 uses the same FF Blast+ midsole material but feels softer and more plush underfoot. It offers 40mm in the heel and 32mm in the forefoot, again with an 8mm drop, but the cushioning feels deeper and cloud-like. The trade-off? It’s stiffer in the forefoot, which reduces flexibility but adds more structure, especially helpful if you’re dealing with forefoot sensitivity or big toe joint issues.
Stability: Stable Neutral vs. Moderate Stability
The Nimbus 27 sits in the stable neutral category. It features:
- Medial and lateral heel sidewalls
- A broad base of support
- Subtle forefoot sole flare
These elements add mild guidance and keep the foot centred—ideal for those who don’t need aggressive stability but still want some structure.
In contrast, the Kayano 32 is a true moderate stability shoe. It builds on everything the Nimbus offers and adds:
- A full 4D Guidance System
- Larger sidewalls
- Broader base
- Sole flare
- And the key differentiator: a 4D Guidance tab under the arch
This denser foam arch support provides subtle but effective control. If you overpronate or want consistent support from heel to toe, the Kayano 32 may be better suited for you.
Check the latest prices below:
Fit & Upper Construction
When it comes to fit:
- The Kayano 32 offers a broader toe box and a plusher upper, which some may find more luxurious.
- The Nimbus 27 uses a lighter, engineered mesh upper with a slightly narrower toe box, though still true to size and length.
Both shoes feature:
- Gusseted tongues
- External pull-on tabs
- Generously padded heel collars
The heel counter is moderately stiff in the Nimbus 27, but noticeably firmer in the Kayano 32, helping stabilise the ankle on contact. That can be beneficial for support—but may not suit those with heel sensitivity, such as Achilles tendinopathy or bursitis.
Performance & Daily Use
For walking or standing all day, both shoes perform brilliantly. If you’re on your feet for hours and need comfort with structure, you can’t go wrong with either.
But in running performance, they differ:
- The Kayano 32, at ~307g, is better suited to easy and long runs, offering consistent support but lacking agility for faster workouts.
- The Nimbus 27, slightly lighter at 300g, includes more aggressive rocker geometry. This makes it better for uptempo sessions, strides, or runners who want versatility without sacrificing comfort.
The difference in the forefoot rocker is clear: the Nimbus 27 has a sharper upward curve, propelling you through toe-off more efficiently than the more conservative Kayano rocker.
Check the latest prices below:
Conclusion: Which One Is Right for You?
Choose the Gel Nimbus 27 if:
- You want a soft, cushioned ride with a hint of stability
- You plan to mix long runs with some uptempo work
- You prefer a lighter, more breathable upper
Choose the Gel Kayano 32 if:
- You need moderate arch support and stability
- You’re prone to overpronation or need extra guidance
- You prefer plush cushioning with a more supportive structure
