Article by Kurt Biesemans
Camelbak Zephyr PRO 12L (149,99€ / $160 now on sale in the US)
Thursday, October 30, 2025
Wednesday, October 29, 2025
ASICS GT-2000 14 Multi Tester Review: 4 Comparisons
Article by Michael Ellenberger and Matt Kolat
ASICS GT 2000-14 ($140)
Introduction
Michael: I have to admit, I didn’t expect much going in. I ran in the GT-2000 way back in high school (early 2000s), and at that time, this shoe was everywhere on my team. Having not run in it in more than 15 years (and being distracted by the flashier ASICS offerings!), I more or less assumed the series was discontinued, or at least that it’d drifted all the way downmarket or been left behind with the modern tech. So, when ASICS sent me a sample pair of the GT-2000 14, I was curious, maybe hopeful… but kept my expectations modest.
To my delight, right out of the box, this shoe surprised me: it feels modern, competent, and a lot more lively than I expected a stability daily trainer to be, especially one that ASICS seems to have no marketing budget for whatsoever!
Matt: I on the other hand felt like Christmas came early. The two previous versions of GT-2000 were some of my favourites shoes of the past years. Nota bene Michael is a crazy fast runner whereas I use running for good mental and physical health.
To me what makes the GT-2000 line special is that it’s a shoe which can be a daily trainer but also makes picking up pace (all relative) quite easy. In fact I know a number of super efficient runners who race in the most advanced shoes out there and use GT-2000 for daily training just to get that extra level of protection with regards to cushioning and supper. I could not agree more with Michael that the shoe feels very modern even compared with the two previous versions.
Pros:
Enjoyable, lively midsole: Michael
Premium feeling materials, including the upper: Michael/Matt
Comfortable fit with unobtrusive stability: Michael/Matt
Lighter than they have any reason to be: Michael/Matt
Do-it-all shoe for the stability crowd: Matt
Cons:
On the narrow side: Michael
Softer than previous two versions, less snap: Matt
Lack of horizontal cutaways in the outsole (as in v12 and v13) makes the toe off and transitions slower: Matt
Very short laces: Matt
Stats
Sample Weights:
men’s 9.3 oz / 263 g US8.5
Stack Height: 36 mm heel / 28 mm forefoot
Platform Width: mm heel / mm midfoot / mm forefoot
Most comparable shoes (with your name next to each)
Saucony Tempus (Michael)
Diadora Nucleo 2 (Michael)
Asics GT-2000 12 (Matt)
Asics GT-2000 13 (Matt)
First Impressions, Fit and Upper
Michael: The upper here screams “premium;” I’m actually surprised by how indistinguishable the materials here are from ASICS’ more top-end trainers (considering that nowadays, $140 is introductory or mid-level pricing). I also have to tip my hat to the lovely team at Runner’s World for answering one of my burning questions - for those wondering, as I was, how this is version 14 for a shoe that’s been around at least 10 years longer, it’s because ASICS formerly increased the nomenclature by 10 (ASICS GT-2140, 2150, etc.), terminating at “2170” in 2012, when this new naming scheme took over. Makes sense to me.
The GT-2000 14 fits more finely tuned than I remembered older GT-2000s. The toe box is decent, though perhaps a touch narrower/tapered compared to earlier models or other brands.
Length is my usual, and the upper feels premium: breathable woven mesh, gives in the right areas, locks in midfoot well. The asymmetric tongue wing helps reduce tongue slip without bulk. The heel counter is firm, which is good for stability, but also low enough that I found it unobtrusive even on a run the day after a marathon race (with a very sore achilles!).
Matt: Just like Michael I do really love the upper. It has been very much re-vamped compared to the previous two versions. What stands out the most to me is the tongue, which is very racy, flat and almost hugs your foot. The main upper is made of very soft and thin stretch woven.
I agree with everything Michael said, the only downside for me however is that the laces are far too short. I really like my ankles to feel secure, so even in a stability shoe I utilize the ‘runner’s knot’. While this is possible in GT-2000 14s, you end up being left with very little lace to actually tie a knot. I can imagine that folks with wider feet, where laces are even more ‘spread’ through the shoe will end up not being able to use the ‘runner’s knot’.
Midsole & Platform
Michael: The midsole is the heart of what has changed in the GT-2000 14, and it’s where the surprise lives. ASICS uses full-length FF BLAST MAX foam in this version, replacing the FF BLAST PLUS in previous model(s). I can’t say I really love all of these names (and really am incapable of keeping them separated in my head without reference), but I can say for certain that the newer foam feels livelier and more responsive, with a bit more pop than I anticipated in a stability trainer (especially one at $140). In my runs, transitions from heel to toe feel smoother, aided by the geometry and sidewall support, and the “bounce” is noticeable without being over the top.
I admit I haven’t worn a shoe in this line in quite a while, but compared to what I expected, there’s really none of that lower-end “firm-but-dull” feeling, but instead a really balanced, modern cushioning sensibility. It’s not a soft maximal shoe, but it doesn’t feel like a stripped-down budget trainer either - it sits in a kind of sweet middle ground.
Even when doing strides, the midsole remains stable and doesn’t feel “dead.” I got a sense of spring, though not in a hyper-energetic or race-flat way. For tempo efforts it holds up well.
Matt: I will skip all the technicalities since Michael has already covered them in great depth. I do agree with Michael that the midsole has a lot of pop and feels soft but I do have slightly mixed feelings about this. The reason for that is the previous two versions of the shoe were a bit firmer but more springy. This allowed previous GT2000s to perform better on treadmills and during faster days. In the case of the 14s the midsole is more tuned to comfort and dare I say is now more attractive to neutral runners.
The softness of the midsole slightly affects the stability performance of this shoe which is ever so slightly less stable than the previous versions. I personally would have preferred if the midsole was a touch firmer, especially in the forefoot as I did really love the more prominent toe off snap in version 12.
Outsole
Michael: There is a lot of tech jargon here; I’ll give the short-form first which is that I think the outsole here is good, probably not great for difficult weather (haven’t had the opportunity to test, but low-depth rubber) and durability similarly seems good but perhaps not great.
More specifically, ASICS now includes their AHARPLUS (high-abrasion) material in the heel, which gives a reinforced landing zone, and lower-hardness rubbers in the rest of the outsole (AHAR LO) to promote smoother transitions and better grip. One thing I observed is that the outsole’s flex grooves are well-placed: the shoe feels snappy when rolling forward, not stiff. As with many modern trainers, the rubber isn’t overly heavy, which is nice - it feels (as I’ve stated previously) very “high-end” in that regard). Over the dozens of miles I’ve put in, I see no major wear yet (though long-term durability is something to continue watching).
GT-2000 14 Outsole
Matt: I don’t see very much wear or tear of the outsole after about 20 miles which is what I would expect from Asics. Asics almost always lasts longer on me than an average shoe, mainly due to large amounts of rubber coverage, at least on the daily trainers.
GT- 2000 13 Outsole
GT-2000 12
As you can see in the 3 pictures above, the geometry and design of the outsole has been re-designed compared to previous versions. The most significant difference is underneath the centre of the front part of the shoe. In v12 and v13 we have deep grooves going horizontally (across) the shoe whereas in v14 this has been replaced with a rubber ‘island’. This is noticeable on the run and makes the v14 the most comfortable of the 3 as it creates a ‘pod’ like effect, at least to me. On the other hand, the grooves in v12 and v13 (but more so in v12) made the front of the shoe a bit more springy and flexible.
Ride, Conclusions and Recommendations
Michael: On easy runs, the GT-2000 14 provides a smooth, comfortable, confidence-inspiring ride. The FF BLAST MAX foam gives just enough liveliness to avoid feeling flat, and the 3D GUIDANCE stability (which I really haven’t addressed, as it just gets out of your way!) is subtle but perceptible: you don’t feel like you’re fighting the shoe, but it quietly helps keep your alignment. I avoided some of that post-marathon knee-weirdness that can happen when your form is really quite bad.
As the pace steps up into moderate and tempo zones, I feel the midsole continuing to perform: the transitions stay fluid, energy return helps, and stability remains solid. In doing strides I didn’t experience any dead zones or harsh feedback. It’s not a lightweight racer, but it remains composed and capable across paces.
So, as you can probably tell, I’m genuinely impressed by how ASICS has modernized the GT-2000 line. This version feels like a worthy contender in the stability daily trainer category. It’s not flashy, and it doesn’t chase the ultra-cushion, max-stack trend, but that restraint is part of its strength. If you’re looking for a dependable all-rounder that can handle easy mileage, moderate workouts, even strides, and you want some structure/stability without heavy intrusiveness, the GT-2000 14 belongs in your shortlist.
For those who liked the old GTs, this is a version that retains the lineage’s reliability while bringing in modern ride feel, foams, and materials. I’d really recommend this trainer (in a way I didn’t anticipate!).
Michael’s Score: 9.5/10
Matt: First and foremost, like in the case of every GT-2000 I did really enjoy training in them both on the treadmill and outside. The shoe feels very stable but it’s a soft stability.
Neutral runners will feel at home as the stability really does get out of the way and overpronators will feel secure and stable as long as you’re okay with a relatively soft midsole and are not looking for firm cushioning.
The transitions are smooth and fast but as I mentioned before there is much more bounce here and less snap that I was expecting compared to previous versions.
In terms of the stability itself it is achieved via a rigid albeit short plastic insert in the heel counter, guide walls/rails on both sides of the shoe and wider midfoot (plenty to land on). Despite all of those features the shoe does feel light and airy - one of the contributing factors is that in fact it’s lost about 9% of weight compared to the previous version.
In the world of stability shoes there are, to me at least, two types of runners: those looking primarily for comfort and those looking for a bit more - dare I ask performance oriented stability trainers. Two golden standard shoes in those respective categories are Brooks Adrenaline (comfort) and Asics GT-2000 (performance).
In the case of V14 for better or for worse that division is somewhat more blurry, V14 has amped up the comfort levels but at the price of being less snappy and less performance oriented.
Is the GT-2000 14 still a fantastic stability shoe? Absolutely. Does it feel different than what I would expect from a GT-2000? It does.
So the only recommendation I would have for V15 is to return back to the roots of GT-2000 and make it a more performance oriented rather than comfort oriented stability daily trainer.
Matt’s Score: 9.5/10
4 Comparisons
Asics GT-2000 12 (RTR Review)
Matt: This was absolutely one of the top shoes I’ve tested in recent years. So much so that it has been elevated to a ‘resident’ shoe in my parents home so that when I travel to visit I always have a great running shoe at hand, saving space in my suitcase. V12 was a perfect blend of stability and fun with a magic, bouncy toe-off. If you still get a chance to get them - get two pairs.
Asics GT-2000 13 (RTR Review)
Matt: V13 was a slight departure from V12 in terms of fun factor and a pivot towards a more familiar feeling, less bouncy, traditional EVA foam. The shoe became more firm, similarly stable but better suited for faster training sessions. If you prefer slightly firmer cushioning than the V14 has to offer this may be a good alternative and it should not be very hard to find them on sale.
Diadora Nucleo 2 (RTR Review)
Michael: Sam sent me his pair of the Nucleo 2 after he gave them a test, and I came away… whelmed. In general, I do think that Diadora is an underappreciated brand (their Equipe Atomo is one of my favorite trainers ever, and I’ve heard nothing about good things about the Gara Carbon) but the Nucleo 2 felt… regular. In fact, I’d say the Nucleo]2 felt about how I expected the GT-2000 to feel but, as I’ve stated throughout, it really surprised me. Not to hold the Nucleo 2 out as a bad shoe (it certainly is not), but there’s nothing on the Diadora that the ASICS doesn’t do better - even the upper (where Diadora usually excels) is a bit bland on the Nucleo, and considerably better on the GT2000. Get the ASICS!
Saucony Tempus (RTR Review)
Michael: There’s a Tempus 2 - I haven’t worn it - but the original Saucony Tempus is a shoe that I’ve still been holding out as a recommendation to folks when they want a dedicated stability trainer with some upside. It’s a dying breed! The Tempus does feel a little faster overall than the ASICS, but, as above, I think largely anything the Saucony can do, the ASICS does better. However, if you’re a fan of that Saucony PWRRUN PB feel (it’s distinct!) you won’t find it with the GT-2000. And, if you want a shoe for consistent workouts or races, I would push you towards the Tempus. For all others, I’d go with the ASICS!
Index to all RTR reviews: HERE
Thanks for reading our review!
Shopping at our partners below is much appreciated and helps support RoadTrailRun
SPORTSSHOES.COM UK/EU
ASICS GT-2000 14 & all GT Shoes
Use our code RTR235 for 5% off all products
Samples were provided at no charge for review purposes. No compensation was provided by brands for writing this article. RoadTrail Run does have affiliate partnerships and may earn commission on products purchased via shopping links in this article. These partnerships do not influence our editorial content. The opinions herein are entirely the authors'.
Tester Profiles
Michael is a patent attorney and graduate of Northwestern University Law School. Prior to law school, he competed collegiately at Washington University in St. Louis (10,000m PR of 30:21). Michael’s PRs include a 66:46 half-marathon and a 2:20:41 marathon PR at the 2025 Houston Marathon. Michael continues to race on the roads, and is chasing a sub-2:20 marathon and potential OTQ in the future.
Maciej 'Matt' Kolat- 40 years old, hailing from Poland but pounding Scottish pavements and trails since 2007. Mainly runs shorter distances on pavement 5-10 km and reserves longer runs for beautiful Scottish Glens. Matt’s opinion sometimes may differ from other RTR testers as he is the slowest of the bunch (5k at 25:38). Matt also uses running as a way to stay healthy having shed 105 lbs so far (and counting).
RUNNING WAREHOUSE US
GT 2000-14
FREE 2 Day Shipping EASY No Sweat Returns
WATCH OUR YOUTUBE REVIEWS ON THE ROADTRAILRUN CHANNEL
Find all RoadTrailRun reviews at our index page HERE
Google "roadtrailrun Shoe Name" and you can be quite sure to find just about any run shoe and all kinds of run and hike gear over the last 10 plus years
RoadTrailRun Official Store Custom Fractel Caps and Bucket Hats
Cap:$35 Bucket:$39
Free US Economy Shipping!
Limited Release! SHOP HERE
Please Like and Follow RoadTrailRun
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)