By Paul Freary
The ASICS Kayano has been around long enough to establish itself firmly as a fan favourite for runners wanting range-topping levels of cushioning and control. I recall early editions of the Kayano having an air of anticipation surrounding them each time a new version was launched.
The Brooks Adrenaline has also become one of, if not the most popular, support category running shoes on the market, thanks to its great value for money and performance. Although not quite as old a franchise model as the Kayano, new Adrenaline updates are just as keenly awaited by long-time fans of the model, and I often have runners asking when the new version is available.
So, the question here is, should you opt for the value proposition with the Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24, or splurge the extra money on the ASICS Kayano 32?
If you click, or buy from, links on this page, we may receive compensation. Learn more
Stats
Running Shoes | Kayano 32 | Adrenaline GTS 24 |
|---|---|---|
Best for | Easy miles Daily training | Daily trainer |
Support | Stability | Stability |
Cushion | Max level cushioning with support | Mid-height cushioning stack with support |
Stack Height | 40mm heel 32mm forefoot | 36mm heel 24mm forefoot |
Drop | 8mm | 12mm |
Weight | Men 304g (10.8oz) Women 260g (9.1oz) | Men’s 284g / 10oz Women’s 250g/ 8.8oz |
Suggested Retail Price | $165 | $135 |
Fit | True to size | True to size |
Rating | 8.5/ 10 | 9/ 10 |
Design
The cushioning in the Kayano 32 has seen an increase, up by 2mm in the forefoot of the shoe compared to the previous model, the Kayano 31.
The FF BLAST PLUS foam, now to 32mm deep in the forefoot, means the heel-to-toe drop is reduced by 2mm, down to an 8mm drop. This gives the Kayano the same stack and drop dimensions as its neutral stablemate, the Nimbus.
I didn’t notice too much of a difference when running in the new Kayano 32, and with just a 2mm difference in the drop, I don’t imagine many runners will.
The FF BLAST PLUS foam has a soft feel and now with the lower drop and increased forefoot depth, a smoother ride than the previous Kayano.
Rearfoot PureGEL is still present in the heel area, but the GEL is now such a small amount, it’s more of a token gesture, and I certainly couldn’t feel any particular ‘extra’ cushioned feel in the area. It is a nod to the brand’s use of the material in the model for many years rather than a real contribution to the cushioning technology.
Support and control come from the brand’s 4D guidance system, a small medial post type structure made from a responsive foam rather than the traditional firmer foam found in medial posts. The thought process here is that the post will ‘spring’ the arch out of an overpronated state and make for a more natural feel and neutral foot position.
The GTS part of the name in many of Brooks’ shoes means ‘Go-To-Support’, and this support is provided by the brand’s GuideRail system.
Both the medial and lateral sides of the midsole cushioning extend up around the rearfoot of the shoe to create the GuideRails. When the foot lands on the lateral side of the heel, the GuideRail ensures it doesn’t supinate.
As the foot naturally pronates, the medial GuideRail ensures the foot doesn’t overpronate. The system works very well and provides a very natural level of support for a wide range of runners, making the shoe a versatile option.
I find the GuideRails work well for my running style, and the Adrenaline is also one of the most popular shoes in my running store, being the choice of a wide range of customers.
The Adrenaline GTS 24 uses DNA Loft v3 Nitrogen-infused foam. Compared to previous models of the shoe, which used CM-EVA based cushioning foam, DNA Loft v3 is softer, lighter and more responsive.
Kayano 32
Shop Now at
Adrenaline GTS 24
Shop Now at
Fit
Both the Adrenaline GTS 24 and Gel Kayano 32 fit true to size in both length and width. Both feature soft, premium, well-made uppers with a good degree of natural stretch to their construction, offering a secure fit around the foot but with a nice degree of ‘wiggle room’ in the toe box.
Of the two shoes, I found the Adrenaline a little slimmer generally than the Kayano, but I’ve had no issue with the size or fit of either shoe.
The mesh construction is very similar in both models, and they both offer a similar amount of breathability. The Kayano perhaps has a very slightly more premium feel to the fit, but this is marginal.
Both shoes have neat, plush padding around the ankle collar and heel area. The Kayano 32 has a thick, padded cushioning collar with an outer stretch pull tab. The Adrenaline GTS 24 has the more conventional, but no less functional, roll top ankle collar, which takes the seam to the outside of the shoe to reduce any potential irritation. I’d say the Kayano has a plusher feel, but that said, I have retained the Adrenaline in my weekly rotation of shoes.
Performance
On the run, I found that it’s the additional cushioning of the Kayano 32 that immediately makes it stand out from the Adrenaline GTS 24. The additional stack of foam makes for a much softer feel.
Whereas the Kayano feels more cushioned and softer, the Nitrogen-infused foam of the Brooks does have a little more natural ‘spring’ to it. Nitrogen-infused foams do tend to have this slightly livelier feel to me and are now used in many Brooks shoes as well as several models from Puma.
The Kayano 32 offers a very soft and smooth ride that I find to be at its best at an easy pace, whereas the Adrenaline tends to have a slightly more responsive feel on toe-off thanks to the DNA Loft v3 midsole. While firmer, the Adrenaline GTS 24 cushioning doesn’t compromise the shoe’s ability to absorb impact, so this shouldn’t be a cause for concern, and I find it a very versatile model.
In terms of stability, it’s the Adrenaline that I find immediately more stable. The GuideRail system seats my foot neutrally within the shoe, and its presence is instantly noticeable. My foot feels ‘sat up, straight’ from the moment I put my feet inside.
The Adrenaline GTS 24 does a great job of controlling both supinators and overpronators, and from my experience, seeing many different types of runners in my store (using video gait analysis), the Adrenaline GTS, as well as its ‘big brother’, the Glycerin GTS are shoes that can control a wide range of pronation movement.
The Kayano 32, while a stability shoe, has become much less supportive than it was a few years ago. It has perhaps taken a more holistic approach to overpronation, guiding the foot into neutral rather than forcing it to be there. I do enjoy the feel of the 4D system; it does work, but it is at its best for mild overpronators rather than those who require a high level of control.
How Do I Decide?
Deciding between these two shoes will most likely come down to the level of comfort for many. In this case, the Kayano immediately feels to me to be the more comfortable of the two options.
BUT, if you have the opportunity to try both shoes in store and on a treadmill, give that a go. The more you run in the two models, the closer they become, and in terms of control, the Adrenaline GTS 24 will most likely be the better option for a wider range of runners who require more support and control.
On the run, I found the Kayano 32 feels soft and smooth and works best at a constant, steady pace. If you want a shoe for this type of training and have other shoes for perhaps speed work or tempo running days, then the Kayano is great.
If you require only mild levels of support, the Kayano 32 is also a better choice.
The Adrenaline GTS 24 feels great during steady-paced runs. The cushioning is soft, with a little spring to it. Should you wish to pick up the pace a little, the nitro-foam does have a small degree of ‘spring’ to it, giving a slightly livelier ride.
If you require more control and a great feeling of support, the Adrenaline is the better option.
My Verdict
So, given all of the above, I think the ASICS Gel Kayano 32 is a shoe that offers soft and SMOOTH cushioning.
The Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24 is a shoe that I find offers soft and supportive cushioning, making it a little more versatile and my choice.
The Brooks also wins in terms of support, offering a greater level of control for a greater variety of runners.
And, when it comes to value for money, the Adrenaline GTS 24 wins once again, at least in the UK. Whereas in the US, both shoes are priced the same, the Adrenaline is almost 10% cheaper than the Kayano, matching its US dollar price.
The Adrenaline GTS 24 wins by half a point thanks to it better value for money offering. This doesn't detract from the quality of the Kayano 32 if price isn’t a consideration.
At a more competitive price from ASICS, the GT2000 offers similar performance to the Kayano 32 at a price closer to the Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24. For a little more money, the Glycerin GTS 22 offers more cushioning than the Adrenaline GTS 24, that is a match for that of the Kayano 32.
I have never worn the Kayano 32, I have worn Adrenaline 24 for a short period.
I have a wide toe box and regular/Narrow heel.
Question is the Kayano 32 consider a semi curve shoe? Or inbetween a Semi Curve and Straight last?
Also I was told that the Adrenaline 24 was full Curve?
How would you compare the Shoes in the aspect of the curve? Thanks.
i was told that the adrenaline 24 curved not much abd GTS guide rail was digging into the ball of foot.
Any thoughts would be helpful. Thanks
The Kayano and Adrenaline are similar in terms of support and aimed at the same type of runner/foot type.
The Kayano is probably a little roomier in the toe box area compared to the Adrenaline.
With regards to the ‘curve’ or ‘last of the shoes’ , brands really don’t mention the last shape any more. Maybe around 5 or 10 years ago shoes were build on a cardboard base within the shoe, but modern construction and manufacturing practise has removed this board or last.
This said, I’d say th Kayano is a little straighter than the Adrenaline and as a result this makes it feel a little roomier within the shoe.
The GuideRails in the Adrenlaine are only really extending into the arch and not the ball of the foot, so it’s more likely the shoe is a little too narrow for you. It is available in width fits.
I hope this helps.
Thank you for the great review. I’m an over-pronator and I’ve used the Kayano line for many years. About 10 years ago, I tried the Adrenaline or Glycerine and it didn’t feel quite as good as the Kayano. After so many years, I’m sure things have changed. With these latest models, would you recommend the Adrenaline or the Glycerine over the Kayano?
I’m 6’2″ and 240 lbs (working on loosing weight).
The Glycerin GTS 22 has certainly changed in recent years and will feel transformational compared to the model from 10 years ago.
The latest model uses a Tuned DNA midsole foam, which is softer in the heel and more responsive in the forefoot. Of course, it is personal preference as to what you think feels the best, but I prefer the slightly springier feel of the Glycerin compared to the softer overall feel of the Kayano. I’d say the Kayano can feel like running on soft sand, where your foot sinks into the sand. Whereas the Glycerin is more like running on a smooth golf course, soft but with a little bounce back. Hope that analogy makes sense!
If you can hold on until January, there’ll be a new Glycerin too, or maybe you can pick up the current model on discount in the next few weeks!
Good luck