The ASICS Gel-Kayano 32 and the ASICS GT-2000 13 are two of the most popular stability running shoes on the market—but they provide that support in very different ways. Whether you’re walking, running, or on your feet all day, this review will break down how each shoe performs so you can decide which one fits your needs best.
For more options across brands, check out our comparison of the best stability running shoes.
Midsole Cushioning and Drop
While both shoes feature FF Blast+ Eco foam and an 8 mm drop, they feel very different underfoot due to their geometry and foam density.
ASICS Gel-Kayano 32
- Heel: 40 mm
- Forefoot: 32 mm
- Drop: 8 mm
The cushioning feels soft and comfortable, especially under the heel when your foot first contacts the ground. The ride transitions smoothly through the gait cycle and provides a cushioned, cloud-like feel. This is an excellent choice for easy runs, recovery days, or long walks.
ASICS GT-2000 13
- Heel: 36 mm
- Forefoot: 28 mm
- Drop: 8 mm
Despite using the same FF Blast+ foam, the GT-2000 13 feels noticeably firmer and more responsive. It’s also significantly lighter, weighing around 266 g in a US Men’s 9 compared to 300 g for the Kayano. This makes it a good option for runners who want some stability without sacrificing a snappy ride.
Stability: 4D vs 3D Guidance Systems
Both shoes offer stability, but through different systems and levels of support.
Gel-Kayano 32
This model introduces the 4D Guidance System, which includes:
- Medial and lateral sidewalls to cradle the ankle
- A denser midfoot guidance tab under the arch
- A broad base and forefoot sole flare
Together, these elements make the Kayano 32 a moderate to maximum stability shoe, ideal for overpronators or runners who need more structured support under the arch.
GT-2000 13
In contrast, the GT-2000 uses a 3D Guidance System:
- Sidewalls on both sides of the heel, though less prominent than the Kayano
- A broad platform and forefoot flare
- No direct arch support tab underfoot
This setup provides mild to moderate stability, giving the shoe a more natural feel underfoot while still offering structured support for those who mildly overpronate.
If you’re comparing support features, you might also like our review of the Hoka Arahi 7 and Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24.
Check the latest price of the shoes below:
Upper Fit and Comfort
Gel-Kayano 32
- Roomier fit in the toe box compared to previous models
- Gusseted tongue with moderate padding
- More padding around the heel collar for enhanced comfort
- Includes a rear pull tab for easier entry
This upper offers a more relaxed and comfortable feel, ideal for daily wear, standing all day, or long-distance runs where upper pressure can become an issue.
GT-2000 13
- Slightly snugger fit, with a more performance-oriented shape
- Also has a gusseted tongue, though less padding around the collar
- Overall lower weight contributes to a more stripped-back feel
Both shoes are available in wide and extra-wide widths, but if you need more room in the toe box or over the instep, the Kayano may be the better choice.
Daily Use: Walking, Running, and Beyond
| Activity | Kayano 32 | GT-2000 13 |
|---|---|---|
| Walking | Excellent | Excellent |
| Standing all day | Excellent | Excellent |
| Easy runs | Excellent | Excellent |
| Recovery runs | Excellent | Moderate |
| Strides or speed work | Limited | Better suited |
| Long-distance runs | Excellent | Excellent |
The Kayano 32 is best if you’re looking for maximum comfort and structured support, especially for slow miles or long days on your feet. The GT-2000 13 offers a more versatile ride—it’s firmer, lighter, and better suited for uptempo workouts or strides, while still offering enough support for overpronators.
For max-cushion shoes with stability, see our Brooks Glycerin GTS 22 review.
Check the latest price of the shoes below:
Final Verdict: Which One Should You Choose?
- Choose the ASICS Gel-Kayano 32 if you want a plush, highly supportive ride, especially for walking, recovery runs, and comfort-focused training.
- Choose the ASICS GT-2000 13 if you want a lighter, firmer stability shoe that still supports mild pronation but feels more responsive for uptempo runs.
Both are excellent shoes, but they’re built for slightly different users. If you value softness and comfort underfoot, the Kayano is hard to beat. If you want something more versatile and lightweight without giving up stability, the GT-2000 is a great choice.
