ASICS GT 2000 12 Review

Upper

Ben: "The heel provides a nice lockdown fit, and forefoot provide a supportive hug of the goot without causing any irritation while on the run. Furthermore, I crossed over a few small creeks and noticed that the 2000 12's upper dried very quickly, which is always a nice feature."

Marie: "The GT 2000 v12 performed well throughout the testing period and was comfortable on my foot. My first impression was that it looked a little lighter and leaner than the previous version, and once on foot, I felt that way as well. The tongue is now gusseted with a thin stretch material, and the tongue construction also provides a bit of strategic padding to keep everything comfortable.

The heel counter has been updated and feels slightly different than version 11's, but it does not lack any performance. Once I laced up, there were no issues with slippage. The mesh upper was supportive and breathable, and my foot always remained comfortable while running in the ASICS GT 2000 12."

Colvin: "I had some issue with the breathability of the mesh in the Georgia heat, and I developed some hotspots during my longer testing runs. Regardless, I should note that the GT 2000 12's upper is very soft and premium feeling. I like that the tongue of the shoe is lightweight and cushioned. The heel has a great lockdown, and the midfoot is secure."

Midsole

Ben: "While running, the ASICS 2000 12's midsole feels light and bouncy underfoot with a slight firmness, but it is not uncomfortable by any means. The midsole's energy return is perfect for running anything over a 6-minute mile pace, and I enjoyed a variety of runs while wearing the ASICS GT 2000 12."

Marie: "Right out of the box, this slimmer, leaner-looking GT 2000 had my interest, and I was looking forward to getting it out on the road to see how it would fair. I was pleasantly surprised by the softness and cushioning, yet I was surprised by the midsole's responsiveness when I picked up the pace. This is a nice improvement from version 11, as the FLYTEFOAM BLAST PLUS foam takes the GT 2000's midsole to a higher level! My gait felt smooth with a touch of stability support. The GT 2000 12's midsole is reminiscent of the Cumulus with a hint of stability thanks to the 3D guidance system, but not as much pronation control as I feel in the Kayano 30 with that thicker, more dense foam on the medial side."

Colvin: "The midsole on this shoe is great. The feel overall is soft yet surprisingly has some responsive elements that come out during my training sessions. I would not call this a plush shoe; however, the insole paired with the midsole is just barely shy of that. Overall, the midsole is well-cushioned and responsive on the road. The support in the shoe is great, and I never felt the support system during my runs, finding that I could run for longer durations because my arches were adequately supported."

Outsole

Ben: "I ran about 100 miles in the ASICS GT 2000 12, and I did so in all sorts of urban environmental settings, including roads, sidewalks, and grassy fields. I never slipped while wearing these shoes, thanks to the GT 2000 12's excellent outsole grip."

Marie: "The ASICS GT 2000 v12 provides confidence-inspiring traction on the road and the grass. On a run through the park, I ran on grass and some soft dirt surfaces. The outsole was not lacking on either terrain.

On the paved surfaces, the GT 2000 12's outsole delivered consistent traction, and it has also shown no signs of wear after collecting my testing mileage. On another note, I noticed that the flexibility of the GT 2000 12 helps the ride feel very natural through the gait cycle, though it may not be for everyone."

Colvin: "The ASICS GT 2000 12's AHAR+ rubber outsole performed very well and always provided superb traction on road surfaces. It had no issues when faced with damp, wet surfaces as well. The rubber compound is not exciting but gets the job done."

Comparable Shoes

ASICS GT 2000 12 vs. ASICS Kayano 30

Marie: "The ASICS GT 2000 12 is a more comfortable and versatile option compared to the ASICS Kayano 30. While the Kayano 30 offers superior overpronation support, the GT 2000 strikes a balance between stability and comfort. The GT 2000 is also a lighter option within the ASICS lineup, making it suitable for a wider range of runners, especially those who do not require as much support as the Kayano provides."

Colvin: "The ASICS GT 2000 12 and ASICS Kayano 30 are popular running shoes, yet they cater to slightly different needs and runners. The GT 2000 12 is a stability shoe designed for runners who struggle with mild to moderate overpronation, providing good support and cushioning underfoot. In contrast, the Kayano 30 is a premium stability shoe offering even more advanced support, making it suitable for those with more significant overpronation issues."

ASICS GT 2000 12 vs. Saucony Guide 16

Ben: "Both the ASICS GT 2000 12 and Saucony Guide 16 are reliable stability running shoes good for daily miles. The GT 2000 12 offers a snugger fit and features ASICS' signature PureGel technology and FLYTEFOAM BLAST PLUS, providing exceptional shock absorption. On the other hand, the Saucony Guide 16 provides a roomier toe box for added comfort and uses PWRRUN cushioning for a responsive ride. Both shoes excel in stability and durability, and choosing between them is a matter of personal preference regarding fit and cushioning preference."

ASICS GT 2000 12 vs. HOKA Gaviota 5

Ben: "This past spring, I wore the HOKA Gaviota 5 for several weeks. The Gaviota has more cushioning in the midsole, but the shoe's heel design broke down pretty quickly, eventually making the shoe unwearable. In the ASICS GT 2000 12, the heel is well made and shows no sign of breaking down, offering more comfort for more miles."