Tuesday, September 29, 2020

Testbericht: Saucony Ride 13 - Die eierlegende Wollmilchsau?

Article by Johannes Klein & Nils Scharff

Link zum original RTR-Test des Saucony Ride 13: HIER (English)

Link zu allen RTR-Testberichten: HIER

Saucony Ride 13 (140€)


Johannes: Der Ride ist der klassische Up-Tempo-Trainer in der Straßenschuh-Reihe von Saucony. Als ich hörte, dass ein Paar auf dem Weg zu mir ist, habe ich mich erstmal ziemlich gefreut und gehofft, dass es die zitronengelbe Farbe werden würde (Was sich zum Glück bewahrheitet hat). Um ehrlich zu sein war ich seit dem Training für meinen ersten Halbmarathon nicht mehr im Ride gelaufen. Damals hatte ich den Ride 9 gekauft und mich dabei auf einige Bewertungen gestützt. Die zehnte Version, sowie die ISO Fit-Modelle habe ich aufgrund mäßiger Bewertungen und meines eigenen Eindrucks im Laden gelassen. Damals hieß das Mittelsohlenmaterial, die “Secret Sauce” von Saucony, noch EVERRUN. Das neue Material, PWRRUN, erstreckt sich diesmal über die gesamte Zwischensohle. Der Saucony Ride 9 war leichter als er aussah. Der Ride 13 fühlt sich - nicht zuletzt wegen der Änderungen am Obermaterial - so schwer an, wie er ist und hat ein gänzlich anderes Laufverhalten. Er ist weich, aber federnd, im Vorderfuß ein wenig reaktionsfreudiger und definitiv eine gute Wahl für einfache Tage. Ob er dem eigenen Anspruch, ein Uptempo-Trainer zu sein, immer noch gerecht wird, werden Nils und ich im Folgenden ermitteln.

Nils: Im Gegensatz zu Johannes hatte ich noch nie einen Ride an den Füßen, dafür aber einige Kinvaras und fast alles, was Saucony dieses Jahr im Angebot hat. Die meisten dieser Modelle bin ich sehr, sehr gern gelaufen. Entsprechend hoch war die Erwartung an den Ride, denn dieser ist Sauconys Daily Trainer - der Schuh in dem man im Zweifel alles laufen kann und neben dem Kinvara vermutlich DER Einstieg in die Marke, sollte man diese noch nie gelaufen sein. Der Ride konkurriert mit Klassikern wie dem Nike Pegasus und folgt analog zu diesem dem Trend nach mehr Dämpfung. Ob er damit zum günstigeren Triumph wird oder ob er seinen eigenen Platz in Sauconys Lineup behaupten kann, wird sich in der Folge zeigen.



  Offiziell: 288g (Herren US9) / 244g (Damen US8)

  Testschuh: 301g (Herren EU 44,5 / US 10.5), 303g (Herren 45 / US 11)

Sprengung: Herren 8mm (24mm Vorfuß / 32 mm Ferse)

Release: Verfügbar im Fachhandel für 140€

Monday, September 28, 2020

ASICS Dynablast Multi Tester Review: Tempering the Blast!

Article by Bryan Lim, Jacob Brady, Michael Ellenberger and Sam Winebaum

ASICS Dynablast ($110 US)



Asics have really turned around with their introduction of the Metaracer, Glideride, Evoride, Nimbus Lite and Novablast. But wait, there’s more! 

The Dynablast is a new shoe in the “Blast” range, and rightly so in also featuring the ever popular FlyteFoam Blast midsole that the Novablast debuted with. While the Novablast is a ‘maximal’ high-cushion trainer, Asics has marketed the Dynablast as a lighter trainer with ‘extra’ cushioning. In other words, this is potentially a worthy lightweight alternative for fans of the FlyteFoam Blast midsole.

Michael: Oftentimes, shoe manufacturers seem to drop “surprises” - less publicized releases that sneak in as well-constructed, smooth-running options. I’m thinking specifically of the Brooks Revel 3, which was a low-end favorite amongst the RTR crew, but some other off-the-radar hits include the Atreyu base model, New Balance FuelCell Propel v2, and Salming EnRoute 3. I didn’t expect to feel this way here, but I think the ASICS DynaBlast actually outshines its bigger brother, the NovaBlast, as a more practical, easy-going everyday trainer. Yes, the drop is 12mm - some will take serious issue with it - and yes, the upper could stand to be tightened up but… for $110, this is about as good as you’re going to find. In fact, I’ve run over 75 miles in the DynaBlast, and am ready to report on all its quirks and comforts. Let’s dig in!

Jacob: The Dynablast is the second (or third as there is also the Roadblast, a $90 shoe) from ASICS to use ASICS’s new FlyteFoam Blast midsole, an energetic, high rebound foam. The first shoe with the midsole, the Novablast, is a soft, max cushion shoe with a super bouncy ride. 

The Dynablast is the lower-stack, lighter, less dramatic companion. Both shoes fall in the daily trainer category. Aside from minor fit issues, I loved the Novablast, specifically the ride which I felt was fun at all paces, fast, and versatile. I thought FlyteFoam Blast foam was a clear winner and was looking forward to seeing it in more shoes, hopefully with a better upper. I also thought it would be great in a high-stack plated shoe. The Dynablast is not the plated shoe I hoped for, but the quick release of another shoe with the midsole has me hoping ASICS will continue to employ this midsole—regardless, I was excited to try it out in the Dynablast.


Bryan/Sam/Michael: Energetic, cushioned and lightweight 

Sam: One of the best if not the best “knit” uppers ever for me: solid rear and midfoot lockdown, roomy comfort oriented toe box with no knit toe pressures

Sam: Beautifully assembled and styled.

Sam/Jacob/Michael: Great value at $110 for a totally up to date lighter daily trainer

Michael: Durability is excellent

Jacob: Consistent and performant ride at a large variety of paces


Bryan: Voluminous toe box, which may be a plus for some, huge drop

Bryan/Jacob: Breathability concerns with the knit upper

Michael/Jacob: Slightly large upper (inclusive of toe box) with some minor lockdown concerns

Sam/Jacob: 12mm drop is felt. Shave 2mm off the heel, add it to the forefoot

Sam: While wonderfully comfortable knit toe box could use a bit more toe bumper structure to lock down foot


Weight: men's 237g, 8.4 oz (US9) 

  Official:    249g, 8.8 oz  (US M10 Asics Australia)

  Samples: 237g / 8.4 oz (US9), / 232g (US8.5), 277g / 9.7 oz (US M12)

Stack Height: men’s  28 mm heel / 16mm forefoot, women’s  27 mm heel / 15mm

Note the Novablast men’s stack height is 32mm heel / 22mm forefoot, 10 mm drop

Offset: 12mm

Available now.  $110 USD

Tester Profile

Bryan is a road and trail runner living in Melbourne, Australia. He is a consistent sub 1:25 half marathoner and is presently chasing a sub 3-hour marathon. He is 176cm tall and weighs about 63kg / 140lbs. 

Jacob runs a mix of roads and trails in the Portland, Maine area. He has been running every day for over two years and averages 50-60 miles per week. Jacob has run several marathons and shorter (≤ 50km) ultras and mountain races in the past two seasons, with a PR of 2:51 in the marathon. In addition to running, he surfs, rides (mountain/gravel/road), and nordic skis. He is 25 years old, 6 ft / 182 cm tall and about 155 lbs / 70 kg.

Michael is a 2019 graduate of Northwestern University Law School in Chicago, with an interest in patent and intellectual property law. Prior to law school, he competed collegiately at Washington University in St. Louis (10,000m PR of 30:21). He recently finished 2nd at the Chicago Half-Marathon in a PR of 67:43, and was the top Illinois finisher in the 2017 Boston Marathon (2:33:03, 82nd overall). He recently secured a 2:31 marathon PR at the Austin Marathon. 

Sam is the Editor and Founder of Road Trail Run. He is 63 with a 2018 3:40 Boston qualifier. Sam has been running for over 45 years and has a 2:28 marathon PR. These days he runs halves in the just sub 1:40 range training 30-40 miles per week mostly at moderate paces on the roads and trails of New Hampshire and Utah. He is 5'10" tall and weighs about 163 lbs.

First Impressions and Fit

Sam: Sleek, modern and elegant the Dynablast is one of those shoes you look twice at the price tag of $110 to make sure it is correct. 

I have not been a fan of knit uppers finding them warm and for me generally over constrictive and snug over the toes. Not so here, quite the contrary.  The toe box is buttery smooth and soft with an equally soft but present toe bumper. Roomy for sure, and while I was true to size I might consider sizing down and wearing thin socks the fit is at the limit of what could be considered a solid hold but for sure comfortable up front. I think it could be improved with a touch more structure to the toe bumper.

The far rear has a more mellow version of ASICS characteristic “clutch” with a very solid substantial heel counter with a thin plastic exterior frame. The rear hold is excellent.

The midfoot has what ASICS calls a “half mono sock construction” with the hold secure and roomy. This is not the stiff plasticky mesh of the Novablast. In addition to the classic Tiger logo providing support, thicker bands of denser 3D knit contribute to support without overwhelming or suffocating.

A more performance oriented fit usually found in shoes of its sub 8.5 oz weight or $110 price, no but a luxurious comfort fit good for most training and I have also found everyday wear.

Bryan:True to its sibling, the Novablast, Asics has done a superb job in the styling with its sculpted midsole and patterned upper that looks and feels similar to the adidas Clima upper. The lime green and black/grey colourway is certainly very ‘current’, and one of many new shoes that sport it, including the Nike Vaporfly, Dragonfly, Skechers Razor+, Go Run 7 and NB Fuelcell RC among others. 

As with the first time I held the Metaracers in my hands, the Dynablast surprised me as to how far Asics has come in terms of innovation. It felt modern, light and screamed for me to put them on!  As mentioned, the toe-box is extra roomy and I found it to be a little long but not to the extent that I would need the size down. Overall I felt that I was in between half sizes so it may be worthwhile sizing down if you prefer a more snug fit.

Michael: As a fan of the NovaBlast (though a critic of its over-squishy ways), I sure was excited to get my feet in the DynaBlast. Despite a quiet launch and lack of marketing, I was pestering Sam to get me on the list for this because it seemed on paper like exactly what I was looking for - a barebones, high-mileage trainer with that (newfound!) FlyteFoam Blast midsole, and with not a lot of fluff. 

My usual size 8.5 fit well - I don’t think I’d go as far as to recommend a size down, but if you’re in-between (as Brian said), then I’d lean towards the smaller option.

Jacob: The Dynablast is a sharp looking shoe. I had only seen the striking black/yellow colorway prior to receiving a light gray/blue colorway. It looks more subdued in this colorway and is clean and aesthetically pleasing. The Dynablast continues the design language of the Novablast, using the same angled styling with a similarly styled midsole sidewall and outsole patterning. 

On the foot, it is notably lightweight. A weighing and comparison to my recorded sample weights for US M12 shoes shows it’s actually the second lightest (behind the NB Beacon v2) non-racing shoe I have tested out of 33 shoes. The midsole is not quite soft, average in feel—not striking just standing around. The high (12mm) drop is felt immediately. As for fit, I had concerns given the knit upper and that I’ve had minor fit issues with both of ASICS 2020 releases that I’ve tested (Evoride and Novablast). However, it feels decent on the foot. Roomy in the toebox, a bit loose overall but with some lace pressure. It’s comfortable with a looser lace though and true to size despite the roominess. Let’s see how security is on the run.


Sam: I am generally not a fan of knit uppers as they are either overly dense and warm (Primeknit)  or compressive and snug particularly over the toes (Flyknit). The newer engineered meshes and even much more modern “knits” such as Atomknit in the Alphfly a super thin open knit and the newest “Flyknit” in the Tempo Next% a non stretch variable density knit have clearly mostly replaced knits in most current shoes.

Yet here ASICS has gone with a knit upper in a more “budget” oriented trainer and by and large it is excellent. Very soft, quite thin for a knit, with a touch of stretch but non compressive. 

All the sounds like a recipe for a sloppy fit but fortunately, by and large, the other elements of the upper: heel counter delivering a characteristic if more gentle ASICS “clutch”, tongue, fairly rigid but in no way overly so Tiger logo overlays at mid foot, and denser 3D knit bands hold everything together for a very comfortable easy on the foot yet secure heel to mid foot fit,

It is at the front in the very soft and generous toe box where while marvelously comfortable and easy on the foot that some tuning would improve the lockdown. 

There is a touch to much volume and yes, and I didn't think I would ever say that about knit uppers, not enough compressive stretch, making for a somewhat loose front fit.

The toe bumper which is a combination of denser knit and a pliable underlay would benefit  from some more structure to help better lockdown the foot. When considering the 12mm drop, which is also in the mix, there is a sense of the front of the foot driving down forward to toe off, which is fine if a bit much, but with not enough hold down to really translate all of the energy of the midsole at the very front of the shoe to toe off, 


Unlike Nike’s Flyknit or Adidas’ Primeknit, the knitted upper in the Dynablast especially in the forefoot is not stretchy and snug, but roomy and rather thick. Whilst not necessarily a bad thing, I would be concerned about utilising these shoes on warmer days. 

Despite the voluminous toe box, the upper is partially saved by the tongue and heel counter. The tongue like the Novablast’s is more modern looking and less padded than the ones found on the Evo and Glideride. Yet it is traditional as it is non-gusseted.  It also seems like Asics made the tongue in the Dynablast less obstructive than that in the Novablast. 

The heel counter provides ample cushion and a decent amount of lockdown with two triangle plastic plates adding on to the reinforced construction. This is a similar build to the Reebok Floatride Panthea and many Adidas models. 

Michael: I tested 2019’s ASICS Gel-DS Trainer 24, with its blue knit upper that I called, “like an old sweater (that doesn’t quite fit).” 

ASICS has mostly cleaned that up here for the DynaBlast, though I think they’re still one step away from a truly well-executed knit upper. Why? Well, as was the case with the DS Trainer, there just isn’t a snug enough fit here. 

I don’t know whether that’s a lack of elastic throughout the material, or just an expectation of larger-volume-foot wearers, but once again I found myself wishing the entire upper - and especially in the forefoot - was about 5% more snug. That translates slightly into the lacing system, which - while largely comfortable and free of irritations or blisters - was on the loose side. There were a couple runs where I was forced to stop and re-tie. 

But - my very first run in this shoe was 18 miles, and I kept coming back to the DynaBlast, so clearly ASICS has done something right. Indeed, for its slight sizing quirks, the upper here is undoubtedly comfortable and breathable - fortunately not hot, given its materials and appearance - and well-crafted without seams or overlays. I don’t think it would be my number one choice for a 90° summer run, necessarily (it is still knit, after all), but I’ve run in everything from 50° to 80° in it, including some light workouts, without issue.

Jacob: The Dynablast upper features a thin knit material which has reinforcement around the midfoot and heel, along with a rigid heel counter. It is nicely textured and sleek in design. 

The knit material is thin and stretchy around the toebox and soft overall. It leads to a comfortable feel, though an odd mix of looseness and lace pressure. If I lace too loosely, midfoot and forefoot security is lacking and it feels sloppy on the run. When a bit tighter, it’s snug on top of the foot, and adequately secure on the run, but still a bit loose-feeling overall. A tighter lace leads to uncomfortable lace pressure. It also holds in heat more than is ideal for summer running. The sizing and fit of the upper is very similar to the Novablast but I think the Dynablast is more comfortable and easier to dial in. Overall, the upper is functional and not a liability, but just average in performance, standing out only in aesthetics. 


Sam: Flytefoam Blast first appeared in the Novablast. The Nova had a wonderfully energetic ride but I found due to its more maximal 32mm heel / 22mm forefoot midsole stack on a relatively narrow platform that they weren’t particularly stable.

The Dynablast drops the midsole stack to 28mm /16 mm and ups the drop to 12mm from 10mm. While not an issue you will notice the ramp down and the 12mm particularly as the forefoot is a somewhat  thin and thin feeling at 16mm. The geometry is more conventional in feel with a well cushioned heel and more agile if not as amply cushioned forefoot as the Nova, 

During my A/B test I also noticed that the cantilevered heel of the Nova softened and also provided a more dynamic roll off the heel.

I wish ASICS had included  2mm more stack up front  to make a 28 mm / 18 mm stack shoe with a 10mm drop. Yes this would have added to weight but I think would have made the Dyna a yet better daily training all miles option. 

Of all ASICS foams I find Blast to have the best balance of lively rebound and light low density feel with the Flytefoam in the Nimbus Lite and ASICS Metaracer denser and bouncier but also fun to run.

Bryan: This is the likely winner of the shoe. Asics have done well in developing the FlyteFoam Blast aka. FFBlast midsole, not to be confused with the FlyteFoam midsole found in the Metaracer, Evoride and Glideride. The FFBlast is marketed as a high-bounce midsole. My observation is that the firmer FlyteFoam midsole found in the aforementioned shoes are aptly accompanied by a rocker that the Novablast and Dynablast do not sport. 

Compared to the Novablast with its 32 mm heel / 22  forefoot stack the Dynablast at 28 mm / 16 mm is clearly a lower stack shoe with 2mm more drop so the lower stack and removing the outrigger heel must  clearly help reduce the weight from about 271 g / 9.55 g for the Nova to 237g,/ 8.4 oz for the Dyna.

Whilst energetic and fun, the midsole does provide a relatively bouncy ride that isn’t soft as New Balance’s Fuelcell midsole nor as responsive as Saucony’s PWRRUN PB. In terms of comparisons, the FFBlast midsole is in my opinion somewhat similar to Nike’s React foam found in the Pegasus. Regardless, it is a unique offering that will be pleasing for many runners for its intended purpose which Asics has marketed as a distance and everyday trainer.

Michael: The elephant in the room (or perhaps known fact, if you’ve read Brian and Sam’s takes) is that the heel-to-toe offset (“drop”) here is 12mm. That gave me pause when reviewing the spec sheet  - and, to be clear, is noticeable when running - but it ultimately was not problematic for me. I like a higher-drop shoe (Achilles pain is never more than a run away, in my book), and while you may notice that the DynaBlast is a higher-offset shoe, I don’t know that it’s 12mm feels any different from the Pegasus’s 10mm, for example.

Setting aside the drop, I found the DynaBlast to be (sorry) a blast. But, unlike the NovaBlast, which was sort of an untempered blast, with a full-length midsole that was exceedingly soft (and fun!), the DynaBlast is sort of a moderated blast - fun, to be sure, but a little denser up front than its brethren. You can certainly feel the road more than on the NovaBlast - especially if you’re a forefoot striker - but it’s not rough enough to complain about.

Jacob: The Dynablast’s name is inspired by its midsole—it’s definitely the defining feature of the shoe. The FlyteFoam blast midsole material used in the Dynablast is solid and stable but lightweight and bouncy. It is unique in its balance of stability and soft and bouncy feel. It is not overly flexible or soft but it is still dynamic and high energy. This is different from many bouncy midsoles which are unstructured, soft, and flexible, such as Saucony PWRRUN+, New Balance FuelCell, and Nike Zoom X. The FF Blast midsole in the Dynablast is well-crafted to provide a balanced feel that is springy and quick moving but not too dramatic and runs well at all paces.

I have shoes with a range of heel-to-toe offsets in my rotation, frequently running in both 0mm and 12mm shoes. Overall I prefer shoes in the 4mm to 8mm range for road running, but appreciate the feel of high drop shoe. In the Dynablast, the 12mm drop is felt and I wish it was 10mm. The difference in feel between the thinner forefoot and bottomless cushion heel makes the shoe feel less cohesive. This is not an issue and the Dynablast runs really well, just a note as I think it would be even better with a slightly lower heel stack.


Sam: Plenty of rubber here which should prove durable. The rear heel rubber is firmer to pressing than areas further forward in the same single span of rubber extending all the way to the toes, It seems may be ASICS is able to inject different densities into the same piece of rubber?

As outsoles and the underfoot geometry of the midsole affect ride, I noticed some differences during my A/B test with the Nova and examined and compared them more closely. 

The orange Nova has deeper central cavity which contributes to its slightly smoother off the heel transition and that characteristic bounce and cushion. I think the cavity also contributes to its relative instability vs, Dyna (left above) with its shallower cavity interrupted by a cross piece leading (along with lower stack) to a firmer feel and not quite as smooth a transition,. Swap these rear designs and I think both would be  improved.

Bryan: The darkhorse feature of the shoe. It is a very nondescript and almost generic looking outsole that is functional and somehow lightweight also. As an everyday trainer, the outsole rubber has been extensively placed for durability. Whilst Asics claim that the cutout of the outsole in the centre rear provides a trampoline effect, I think it serves a functional purpose of weight-saving. On my runs the outsole provided me with ample traction, even in slightly damp conditions on grass.

Michael: Agreed with Brian - this is a major selling point. After 75 miles on the DynaBlast, there is almost no wear to the outsole, visually. Photos are below. The rest is standard for a trainer of this ilk - it’s grippy, it’s responsive, etc. But most of all, it’s durable - for $110!

Jacob: The Dynablast outsole is fairly full coverage rubber with critical flex grooves and midsole channels. Particularly important is the well underneath the heel, which allows the heel to sink in more and provide a notable bounce as it rebounds. This design is nearly the same as in the Novablast, though the channel is deeper and more continuous in the Novablast, which makes the Novablast more bouncy and less stable. 

In the Dynablast, the feel of the rubber on road is smooth, traction is good including on dirt paths, and the rubber has proven durable so far.


Sam: I would call the ride modernized traditional in the sense that we clearly have a high drop to a relatively thin,, quite flexible forefoot executed with a state of the art and lively foam. For sure I was always super comfortable in the Dynablast due to its upper but as stated in midsole wished for a touch more stack height  up front which I think would easily move it into a top class all around daily trainer. 

The ride is easy going with very good ground feel and more than adequate lively cushion for shorter runs at any pace. Often shoes in this class of weight and price range are focused on faster, shorter, and are relatively responsive and firm with a flexible forefoot. Here, while by spec and price we are in that category, we have a pleasant lively ride which I found suited slower as well as faster paces, but as Bryan says below, and I agree, not workouts or fast high intensity tempo or intervals mostly due to that oh so comfortable but a touch unstructured toe box 


Barring the slight issue with sizing, the ride was pleasing and energetic. They were comfortable and generally nimble for an everyday shoe, also given its general bulk. The bulk of the shoe doesn't hinder the ride in any way as it is overall a well balanced shoe which allows for smooth transitioning. The bulk is also caused by a general wide base which provides good stability. 

Despite its lightweightness, it isn’t a pair I would take on speed sessions or uptempo runs given the construction of the upper. In saying that, the FFBlast however is capable of doing quicker runs. Without a rocker, this shoe will appeal to those who are looking for a traditional, versatile and cushioned trainer. In saying that, many will be concerned about the 12mm drop. As mentioned in my video review, it feels more akin to 10mm. These days, even 10mm may serve to be too large a drop. While it runs fine, I personally prefer a 8mm drop in my everyday running shoes.

Michael: The DynaBlast is smooth! It’s energetic! It’s not necessarily the most exciting trainer I’ve tried in 2020 - in fact, it certainly isn’t - but it checks all the boxes for a fun, everyday trainer. The high drop gives some general sensation of propulsion and, despite a relatively thin forefoot platform, I found the FlyteFoam Blast engaging at toe-off. The ride itself may be sufficient for faster running, but, as mentioned above and by others, I think the somewhat sloppy upper takes away from that slightly - I’d prefer the NovaBlast to the DynaBlast if running a tempo run, for example. 

Still, I think the DynaBlast is more than adequate for everyday runs, and even long runs - as mentioned, my first session in these was an 18 mile cruises, and (besides having to stop and re-tighten them), I had absolutely no problems - even when ripping a 5:30 18th mile.

Jacob: The Dynablast has a versatile, lively, lightly bouncy, stable ride that is fantastic as an all-around trainer. It is a blend of traditional, high drop, not-much-rocker feel and a lightweight bouncy, modern trainer. Overall, the ride is smooth, adequately protected (the thin forefoot was not noticed for me, as a midfoot-to-heel striker), and easy to run slow or fast in. 

Over half of my test runs in the Dynablast have been on the faster end of paces I run in training when I wasn’t even planning to run fast. The Dynablast geometry doesn’t encourage speed like a rockered or plated superfoam shoe, but it is lightweight, quick to turn over, and doesn’t hold me back. Additionally when I’m running slow the ride is just as smooth, though less of the bounce is felt.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Sam: ASICS has delivered a more “budget” oriented trainer that does not skimp anywhere- be it design, its superb if a bit easy going upper in the front after a super solid heel area, and a great modern midsole foam in FlyteFoam Blast and plentiful outsole rubber. And all at a very reasonable $110 and a low weight. of 8.4 oz / 238g.

It suffers a bit with its noticed 12mm drop, fairly thin forefoot for a modern trainer, and maybe for some not totally locked down but oh so comfortable toe box. 

Its commendable all around volume, especially upfront and slightly stretchy but very non compressive knit makes it a good choice for more medium to slightly broader feet and a bit less secure for narrower lower volume ones,, especially for fast pace workouts, The Dyna is somewhat hard to categorize sitting between lightweight performance and daily training. This said it would be a great choice and solid value for runners who run moderate to lower milesages at a variety of paces as a single stylish and modern option.

Sam’s Score: 9/10

Ride:9 (50%) 9 Fit: (30%) Value:9 (15%) Style: 9.5 (5%)

I deduct for Ride as I think that a slightly higher overall stack and lower drop with more cushion up front could improve forefoot cushion and tone down the ramp. As for Fit it’s a fantastic knit upper which could use a touch more toe area structure. A solid Value as an all arounder but maybe not so much for me who prefers a more distinct difference between performance and training, despite the commendable low weight for cushion here. Love the styling. 

Bryan: The Dynablast was released amid the hype of the stacked arrival of many super shoes, which seems to have taken the spotlight from the staple that is everyday trainers. Bar the slight fit issue for me, I would have loved rather than liked the Dynablast. It is a great looking shoe that offers a lot of value. I can’t extrapolate as to how it would fit had I sized down but the fit is overall the only qualm of the shoe for me. The second slight issue is the breathability of the knit upper. 

Putting those aside, the ride of the FFBlast is truly a step in the right direction by Asics. It is a great looking shoe that looks and certainly feels fast given its low weight in a moderately well cushioned package. Having never been a fan of Asics, their products have impressed me recently, and the Dynablast is yet another worthy showing. Note that my below score is largely downed by the fit, which I wish I could provide a conclusive rating had I been able to try half a size down.

Bryan’s Score 7.7/10

Ride: 8 (40%) Fit: 6 (30%) Value (including durability): 9 (15%) Versatility 9 (10%) Style: 9 (5%) 

Michael: There aren’t that many shoes that I continue to come back to after their review period, and (unfortunately!) not that many shoes I get to put 70+ miles on, so in that regard, the DynaBlast is in a relatively unique class. It’s fun, poppy, and relatively lightweight. Sure, the upper (as with the DS Trainer line) could use some tightening up, and some may be put off by the 12mm drop, but at $110, I think the DynaBlast is one of the best low-end trainers on the market today.

Michael’s Score: 9.3/10

Jacob: The Dynablast is a lightweight trainer with a modern, bouncy and energetic midsole, but still a controlled and not-too-dramatic ride. It runs smoothly at all paces. Though not strikingly quick like a plated shoe, it is fun to run fast in and moves along effortlessly, toeing-off quickly and with energy. The ride and general underfoot feel is average in cushion and softness—subdued enough that it would likely be enjoyed by a variety of runners. The knit upper is the weak point being slightly warm and hard to dial in the fit, but it doesn’t ruin the shoe. 

Overall the Dynablast is a competent, enjoyable do-it-all trainer. it's a great pick for a single-shoe runner or for those looking for a lightweight daily trainer to put in their rotation. At $110, it has tremendous value.

Jacob’s Score: 8.73

Ride: 9 (50%) Fit: 8 (30%) Value: 9.5 (15%) Style: 8 (5%)


Asics Dynablast vs Asics Novablast  (RTR Review English)

Sam: The Novablast has more cushion stack and 2mm less drop and both are felt in comparison to the Dynablast. While the additional cushion is welcome the Novablast is not as stable for me. The uppers don’t compare with the Nova’s stiffer but well held and not particularly comfortable plasticky upper contrasting with the soft knit quite unstructured front easy going Dyna’s. If the stability is not an issue then the somewhat heavier more cushioned and bouncier Nova may be a better daily trainer while the Dynablast is a lighter somewhat lower riding shorter distances shoe.

Michael: I went over my general comparison above, but specifically, I think you could find a place for both of these models in your lineup. The NovaBlast is cushioned, bouncy, and quite fun to run - but, as Sam noted, is not particularly stable and falters slightly at slower, more relaxed paces. Some runners will love the bounce of the Nova for uptempo running (I tend to prefer a slightly firmer ride underfoot), but regardless, I think most runners will appreciate the stable platform and yes, higher drop of the DynaBlast for everyday running.

Jacob: The Novablast is notably softer, bouncier, more propulsive, and more dramatic. It is one of the most fun and exciting trainers I have ever run in. In comparison the Dynablast is greatly toned-down, feeling firmer, less bouncy, and more traditional. However, the Dynablast is also lighter, more stable, and is more comfortable, though both fit similarly overall, so I wouldn’t pick it for that alone. Overall, the Novablast is more fun (insane, almost too hard to control trampoline-tyle bounce off the toe at speed), so if I had to have one I’d definitely choose it. However, the Dynablast would likely be enjoyed by a wider variety of runners as it is less extreme, but still quick-moving and enjoyable.

ASICS Cumulus 22 (RTR Review)

Sam: More than an ounce heavier with a 9mm drop vs the 12mm of the Dynablast the firmer Cumulus can be thought of as a more traditional light daily trainer and the Dynablast essentially as a new age version of the Cumulus. The Dynabllast’s upper focus more on comfort up front while the still very comfortable Cumulus’s more on performance. 

Michael: ASICS lineup is indeed confusing in 2020, with models seemingly stepping on each others toes, but both the Cumulus and DynaBlast are fun, worth-trying models. While the upper in the Cumulus is a little more taut, I think I still prefer the ride of the FF Blast midsole and the durability that comes with it!

Asics Dynablast vs Adidas SL20 (RTR Review English)

Bryan: Both are everyday trainers that offer great value, but in very different packages. The SL20 is lower-stacked and firmer and is able to serve as a budget racing flat. Often available at bargain prices, the SL20 may be the more attractive option but I find it too harsh to use it on a regular basis. The SL20 wins on speed and lockdown but the Dynablast is generally a better everyday trainer.

Sam: Bryan is correct. Faster, considerably firmer if well cushioned in a dense way, more locked down, the SL 20 can be raced but for me only shorter distances . It has a very noticeable response and snap while the Dynablast as a more easy going bounce. If you are looking for a single lighter shoe for basic running from easy to moderately fast the Dynablast is a better choice. If you are looking for an uptempo shorter run workhorse the SL 20.

Asics Dynablast vs Reebok Floatride Panthea (RTR Review English)

Bryan: The Panthea is my favourite all time daily trainer and features an Pebax and EVA midsole that works a treat at all paces. While there is no official stack height, the Panthea offers me ample protection. It's 8mm drop also suits me better than the Dynablast’s 12mm drop. The Pebax in the Panthea edges the FFBlast in the Dynablast in providing for an exciting ride. It also edges the Dynablast on weight, albeit by only 10g (0.35 oz). The Panthea is overall a better shoe in my opinion in terms of versatility and ride. It is also a touch lighter.

Asics Dynablast vs Nike Pegasus 37 (RTR Review English)

Bryan: The Pegasus 37 is arguably the best looking everyday trainer out there at the moment. However it is a shoe that I have struggled with. Whilst it seems to work for many, the ride and or fit of the Pegasus provides for a rather clunky experience. It weighs in at 30g heavier than the Dynablast. The Dynablast wins here.

Sam: II agree with Bryan about the men’s Peg 37. The women’s version with its softer React foam, lower PSI air pods, lighter weight and lighter density upper than the men’s is smoother running and more versatile than the Dynablast.  

Michael: As with others, I would take the Dynablast every day of the week over the (men’s) Pegasus 37 which, while properly incorporating Nike’s React foam, has a bit of an Air problem up front. Go with ASICS.

Asics Dynablast vs Saucony Endorphin Speed (RTR Review English)

Bryan: Probably not a fair competition here where the Endorphin Speed is a Nylon plated trainer that is aimed at speed sessions. However, if I needed one shoe that does all, the Endorphin Speed would be my go to as it is capable to train daily in and responsive enough to race in. That said, the Dynablast in having ample outsole will most certainly outlast the Endorphin Speed.

Sam: I concur with Bryan. This said the Dynablast is a better choice and better value as an all around shoe for runners seeking a single light trainer for moderately low mileages at varied but not top paces. 

Asics Dynablast vs Adidas Boston 8 (RTR Review English)

Bryan: Adidas’ well-loved Boston is a versatile daily to uptempo trainer. Unfortunately, Boost is considered to be heavy these days, but the combination of Boost and EVA / Lightstrike (depending on the Boston 8 variant) works a treat in providing for a responsive and versatile ride. Fans of high-stacked and cushioned shoes will likely favour the Dynablast but I would pick the Boston 8 over the Dynablast. 

Asics Dynablast vs New Balance Fuelcell TC (RTR Review English)

Bryan: The TC is in my opinion just shy of the Endorphin Speed in terms of versatility, weighed down… by its hefty weight. It does provide for a softer ride than the Dynablast and Endorphin Speed, although not as bouncy. The ride whilst a little bottom heavy is more energetic and exciting than the Dynablast with a full length plate sitting within the Fuelcell midsole. It also retails for a full AUD$100 more. The Dynablast offers better value but the TC provides for an unmatched experience when placed side by side. 

Sam: A huge $90 difference in price between these two for sure gives pause. They both have energetic rides but the TC with its carbon plate and soft FuelCell foam is both more versatile and a lot more fun to run. A do anything from training to racing shoe but a heavier shoe than Dynablast.

Michael: Sam and Bryan are right to point out the price difference - it sort of makes this decision a false one. Yes, the FuelCell TC is a markedly more fun trainer, with a superb midsole and well-integrated plate… but for easy, every day runs, I think many runners will get the same benefit from the “regular ol’” DynaBlast, and save some cash in the process.

ASICS Roadhawk 2 and Dynaflyte 3 (RTR Review)

Sam: I would call the Roadhawk and Dynaflyte direct descendents of the Dynablast as a reasonably priced (especially RoadHawk), moderate mileage trainers. These two represent ASICS past, the Dynalast its future. The Dynablast is better in every way from ride (softer and more energetic) to fit (comfort knit vs cruder mesh) than these two. The somewhat more expensive Dynaflyte had a similar to the Dynablast more unstructured upper with the Dynablast’s knit a clear forward evolution in comfort but maybe not quite as performance oriented hold.

Brooks Revel (RTR Review)

Michael: I did not test the Brooks Revel 4, which the rest of the RTR team seemed to enjoy, but I did call out the Revel 3 as a low-priced contender that was a surprise hit, much like the DynaBlast. The uppers are comparable in their construction; I think the Revel has a slightly snugger fit in my 8.5, compared to the looser, more malleable DynaBlast. Underfoot, the Revel has a slightly livelier foam than the DynaBlast, and I think feels bouncier than the more traditional-riding ASICS. Still, both are enjoyable and punch above their weights. Having not tested the Revel 4, it’s hard to pick a winner, but know that if you enjoyed the Revel 3, I think you’ll similarly enjoy the DynaBlast (and good on you for saving some pennies!).

Brooks Launch 7 (RTR Review)

Sam: Leaning more towards daily training and versatility for faster workouts than the Dynablas,t the very fairly priced at $100 and heavier by 1.4 oz (alot)  Launch has a very dated, firmer and duller ride in comparison but is a great value if you seek a conventional durable conventional riding trainer, 

New Balance FuelCell Propel v2 (RTR Review)

Jacob: I finished testing the Propel v2 less than a month before receiving the Dynablast and this was one of the first comparisons I thought of during my first run in the Dynablast. Both are low-price, slightly bouncy, stable, durable, consistent, smooth do-it-all daily trainers. The Propel upper is more comfortable and secure and the ride is smoother as slow paces or longer runs due to lower drop (6mm vs 12mm Dynablast, thus more forefoot stack), rocker, and outsole. However, the Dynablast is much lighter (1.3 oz lighter in my US M12) and easier to run fast in. It has more pop as speed where the Propel starts to feel a bit cumbersome. I like the Propel more for longer or slower runs but the Dynablast is superior at faster paces. For a one-shoe quiver the Dynablast is the call because of its larger range of smooth paces, but if you’re looking for just a general daily trainer I’d recommend trying out both.

Reebok Symmetros (RTR Review)

Sam: The Symmetros shares many characteristics with the Dynablast including a thinner agile forefoot, stable well cushioned heel, and for me a lack of toe box structure. It is exactly an ounce heavier at 9.4 oz. I slightly prefer its springier denser ride. The Symmetros upper, in contrast to Dynablast's, is very, very breathable among the most breathable of 2020 trainers. The Symmetros if it works up front for you (and it favors a yet higher volume forefoot than Dyanblast ) is a slightly more versatile daily training choice,

Reebok Forever Energy (RTR Review)

Sam: If you want an uptempo performance  focused $100 light trainer in a just sub 9 oz shoe go with the Forever Energy. If you want a more comfort oriented (for sure) upper with somewhat more heel cushion and more bounce as opposed to denser response go with the Dynablast.

Jacob: The FFE (version 1) was conceptually a great budget daily trainer with a modern midsole, but I never found it that enjoyable, largely because of the crude, scratchy, poor-fitting upper. Though balanced in cushioning, rebound, and cruisability, the midsole was also slightly blocky and lacking in smoothness. The Dynablast is notably lighter, smoother, fits better, and is more enjoyable to run.

Skechers Go Run  7+ Hyper (RTR Review)

Michael: The Dynablast and GoRun 7+ Hyper are both fun trainers, but I would take the Skechers every day. The Hyperburst midsole on the 7+ is perfectly proportioned for cushion without limiting speed, and the knit upper is immensely comfortable. Those who should look at the ASICS are those who have wider feet or generally need more room in the toebox - the ASICS just has more volume and a more malleable material. For all others - take the Skechers! One of my favorite trainers ever. 

Salomon Sonic 3 Accelerate (RTR Review)

Sam: At almost the same weight 8.3 oz vs 8.4 oz, the Accelerate is a more versatile lower drop (6mm) choice. Its ride is more cushioned at the forefoot if a bit less at the heel and denser in feel than the bouncier more energetic if thinner feeling up front FlyteFoam Blast in the Dyna. It’s upper is more performance oriented than comfort and narrower upfront. Although $130, so $30 more, if you seek a single, light, durable and versatile trainer Accelerate is my pick. If comfort and more easy going is your game you won’t go wrong with the Dynablast.

Read reviewers' full run bios here
The product reviewed was provided at no charge for testing. The opinions herein are the authors'.
Comments and Questions Welcome Below!
Please let us know mileage, paces, race distances, and current preferred shoes

RoadTrailRun receives a commission on purchases at the stores below.
Your purchases help support RoadTrailRun. Thanks!

USA  Men's & Women's SHOP HERE Available Now!
FREE 2 Day Shipping EASY No Sweat Returns
EUROPE Men's & Women's SHOP HERE Available Now!

Men's & Women's SHOP HERE
Join VIP Family, Get Free Shipping and 15% in VIP Benefits on every order, Details here

Men's & Women's SHOP HERE


Please Like and Follow RoadTrailRun
Facebook: RoadTrailRun.com  Instagram: @roadtrailrun
Twitter: @RoadTrailRun You Tube: @RoadTrailRun