Head-to-head · Best Running Shoes for Flat Feet

ASICS Gel-Kayano 32 vs ASICS GT-2000 14

Which is the better buy? Side-by-side on rating, price, strengths, and watch-outs — with the published ratings we averaged to get there.

Verdict is reader-supported. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Some links on this page are affiliate links — if you click through and buy, we may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. Our ratings are sourced from independent publications, not sponsors.

The short answer

ASICS GT-2000 14 comes out ahead by a narrow margin (4.5 vs 4.3). ASICS GT-2000 14 is best for: runners wanting balanced support and durability. Read the strengths below before deciding.

Ranked #4 in Best Running Shoes for Flat Feet

ASICS Gel-Kayano 32

4.3

4 sources$159.95as of Oct 11

RunRepeat's review confirms the ASICS Gel-Kayano 32 lives up to its stability reputation, with better durability and shock absorption than before. Tom's Guide noted the thick, rugged design adds cushioning and stability, while the firmer foam and low energy return are hard to miss. Its reduced drop makes it a better match for midfoot and forefoot strikers. Reviewers criticized the energy return and the premium price, especially in Europe. Heavier runners who want comfort and support will be well served; anyone who wants a lively ride will not.

Strengths

— Amazing shock absorption with 133 SA in the heel and 116 SA in the forefoot
— Made to last with a heavy-duty outsole and excellent grip
— Dependable for most pronators with stable support

Watch-outs

— Bad energy return with only 47.8% score, unsuitable for runners seeking a lively ride
— Overpriced in Europe
— Feels bottom-heavy due to ultra-thick midsole and overall weight

$159.95 · Check Price on Amazon Full review →

Higher ratedRanked #2 in Best Running Shoes for Flat Feet

ASICS GT-2000 14

4.5

2 sources$109.95as of Oct 23

The ASICS GT-2000 14 is a stability daily trainer that swapped FF Blast+ for FF Blast Max and got softer and bouncier for it. RunRepeat scored it 87 out of 100 and Road Trail Run 9.5 out of 10. Support comes from geometry rather than a medial post, the outsole is durable, and the toebox is tapered enough to rule the shoe out for wide feet.

Strengths

— Improved FF Blast Max foam provides stronger shock absorption with 132 SA in the heel and 110 SA in the forefoot
— Outstanding outsole durability with dependable traction for everyday use
— Full-length medial stability system offers consistent support from heel to forefoot

Watch-outs

— Tapered toebox may feel restrictive and limits toe splay, especially for those needing extra room

$109.95 · Check Price on Amazon Full review →

How they stack up

ASICS Gel-Kayano 32

The ASICS Gel-Kayano 32 provides superior shock absorption compared to the Hoka Gaviota 6 and Saucony Hurricane 25, but its low energy return makes it less lively than the Saucony Tempus 2. While it's more durable than the New Balance Fresh Foam X 860 v14, it's also heavier and less responsive.

ASICS GT-2000 14

The ASICS GT-2000 14 offers better shock absorption than the Hoka Arahi 8 and provides more consistent support from heel to forefoot than the Saucony Guide 18. However, it's less breathable than the New Balance Fresh Foam X 860 v14 and has a more restrictive toebox than the Hoka Gaviota 6.

Specs side-by-side

Spec	ASICS Gel-Kayano 32	ASICS GT-2000 14
Weight	10.4 oz	9.6 oz
Stack Height	39.9 mm	36.5 mm heel / 28.5 mm forefoot
Drop	8 mm	8 mm
Midsole	FF BLAST PLUS ECO	FF Blast Max foam
Stability	Yes	GuideTrac
Arch Support	Medium	Medium
Upper	Engineered mesh	Engineered mesh
Outsole	HYBRID ASICSGRIP	AHAR rubber
Dimensions	12.44 x 6.3 x 4.75 inches; 1.44 pounds	12.44 x 6.3 x 4.75 inches; 1.44 pounds

← See the full ranking of best running shoes for flat feet