Asics GT-2000 6 Running Shoe Review vs Asics Gel Kayano 24 Comparison

Josh reviews the Asics GT-2000 6 and compares it to the Asics Gel Kayano 24 to highlight the subtle differences and help you determine which of these two leading running shoe models is best suited for the type of running you enjoy the most.

Both models are designed for over-pronating runners and are available in multiple widths and colourways, so you’re bound to find the perfect match for your feet.

The Asics GT-2000 6 has been re-engineered with dramatic changes, including a FlyteFoam cushioning system for an even lighter and softer ride.

Check out the full review with transcript below.

Hi guys, Josh here from Sportitude with shoe review time.

We’ve got in front of me right here the GT-2000 6. It’s a new shoe in the Asics series and it just dropped in for us December 2017.

It’s a completely new shoe. What they’ve done with this little guy is basically change nearly everything, but stuck to what this shoe has built a big reputation on in the last 20 to 25 years.

We’re going to talk about what foot types should run in the shoe and then talk about the cushioning system, upper and outsole. That hopefully gives you enough information about this shoe and whether it’s right for you.

I’m also going to touch on where the GT-2000 and the Kayano sit in the whole Asics story and what shoe you should be considering, because it’s a question we get all the time. Hopefully I can give you some information at home to help you make that decision easier.

First and foremost, let’s talk about the GT-2000 6. The biggest change in this shoe is the cushioning system. We’ve seen FlyteFoam for the last 18 months. It’s introduced in a couple of shoes in the early days of Asics and then they’ve started to roll it out into a lot more of there range.

FlyteFoam coming into 2018 is going to make up nearly 90% of there performance running shoes. There is still going to be a lot of shoes that carry the FluidRide midsole which they’ve had the last 6 years, give or take.

Now obviously the head office in Japan have identified that FlyteFoam is the way to go and they’re going to be pushing it into more shoes.

I’ve talked about what FlyteFoam is about in my previous videos. It’s a lighter EVA cushioning system. FluidRide which they’ve used in the past was a great cushioning system and was more responsive.

However, you’ll find that FlyteFoam when you put it on your foot is a little bit softer, so you get a bit more cushioning underneath your foot. Did they need to do that because they have the Gel pods? Probably not, however they have.

What they've done with the Gel cushioning system at the back of the GT-2000 is that visual Gel pod is on an angle, lower at the back of the shoe and comes a little bit higher as you get past the strike zone point.

This is the first time Asics have tried a different angle of cushioning system. The Gel has been pushed ever so slightly closer to the contact point on the ground, so when you’re running on that heel strike zone, it reduces the impact as soon as the shoe hits the ground. Also, having the angle up ever so slightly gives the foot a cradle cushioning system.

You don’t lose that contact point essentially, you don’t lose that Gel cushioning system. When it was parallel with the ground in the past, the feedback was you’re losing that feel on contact with the ground, then as you come through transition phase the Gel kicks in.

What they’re doing now is obviously trying to make it consistent from contact point as you transfer to midstance.

On the medial side we’ve got their Dynamic DuoMax. In the past it used to be identified with a big grey foam. Some of the Asics shoes or the stability shoes are identified with the grey foam, but the cosmetic decision at head office was to clean the shoe up.

I agree, it looks great and sharp. The medial and lateral side are nice and consistent. However, this does have arch support, you just can’t see it, but it’s written there – Dynamic DuoMax.

This aqua coloured foam that sits on top is another gentle assistance, splitting your foot and the arch support. The idea there being is you don’t feel that arch underneath your foot because it’s not going to be as intrusive as you go through your midstance phase.

Another feature I’d like to talk with the GT-2000 is the heel counter. It feels deeper, it fits deeper, it is deeper.

At the back here, they’ve increased the depth by a couple of millimetres. There’s no measurement Asics have given us, we’re just going on feedback in store and I’ve personally done a few runs in this shoe.

I felt it fits a lot deeper at the back which I like. I like having security. When the foot hits the ground, I like to know the upper of the shoe is holding me in.

The other thing I found was the angle of the heel counter leans in a little big more, hugging the back of that Achilles. Just again, subtle changes but they certainly make the shoe fit and feel a lot nicer around the back of the ankle.

Coming through to the forefoot, in the past we’ve seen with the 2000 series and even some other Asics supportive shoes that there’s a lot going on. There’s overlays, there’s stitching, there’s bits and pieces to make sure the upper does an important role as you go through to your toe-off phase.

They’ve always taken the underlays out, they aren’t there. They've just used an overlay. Let me explain the difference between the underlays and overlays. Underlays are the invisible mesh lining or straps you can’t see, overlays are the stuff you can see.

The V triangle shape is an overlay they put on that medial side to give the foot a little bit more stability through midstance, so therefore we minimise the amount of movement as we come through toe-off.

Getting the support on the upper as well as the arch support will minimise the amount of movement you have off that first metatarsal joint as you toe-off. It’s a great feature change.

Talking about the width stories. I love talking about the widths because when a brand is making widths, it means they care. In the 2000 you have the standard D, 2E and 4E in men’s. In women’s you’ve got 2A which is the narrow fit, B, D and 2E. There’s four widths in the ladies GT-2000 and three widths in the men’s.

That covers most of the changes in the GT-2000. What I'd like to talk to you about now is the differences between the Kayano and the GT. Which one would be more applicable to you as a runner?

Straight away I can feel the difference in my hand that the Kayano is slightly heavier. They have an external Meta clutch heel counter. Therefore, its more stable at the back of this shoe. There’s a little more weight which had been added in the back for more stability.

Also, the Gel pods are slightly larger, so you’ve got rearfoot Gel and forefoot Gel, however the pods themselves are a bit bigger.

Going back to the Asics GT-2000 6, I must add there is a Gel pod through the forefoot. The cross on the outsole indicates right where that pod sits underneath that forefoot. Both have a Gel heel and Gel forefoot, there’s just more in the Kayano. That increases the weight ever so slightly.

We’ve also got the Dynamic DuoMax in the medial side. Our stats tell us that the arch support is nearly identical in both these shoes. There’s not one that provides more arch support than the other. That’s a misconception with our running community out there, the more you pay the more support you get. No, that’s not the case.

You get almost identical support from the Kayano as you do the GT-2000. It’s just the 2000 is lighter than the Kayano. The Kayano technically should last a little bit longer, which it does ever so slightly.

But for the runner out there who is maybe mixing up their runs a little bit, "I’m going for my consistent long slow Sunday strolls, and I want to do a speed run on my Tuesday nights and on Thursday mornings I want to mix it up with a bit of fartlek running", you’ll probably find the 2000 a better shoe for you.

Why? It’s designed for long distance, consistent miles, speed and pace. However, being a little bit lighter you can mix up your running a little bit, try some different strike zones and not feel like you’re running with a slightly heavier shoe on your foot.

I want to touch on that because the Kayano is not a gumboot, it’s not a heavy shoe it’s just a little bit heavier than the 2000.

There you have it guys, the Asics GT-2000 6 – great little addition. Yes, they’ve made some dramatic changes to this shoe, but all for the better.

Happy running guys and we’ll see you next time.