By Kieran Alger
ASICS’ two big daily cruisers have recently been updated with some important changes. The Kayano 32 now has a bigger forefoot stack and a lower drop that now matches the offset of the Nimbus 27. Meanwhile the Nimbus 27 also adds even more soft stack across the shoe for a super-protective ride.
Both shoes pack big midsole stacks and plush uppers and are built for cruising your daily miles in cushioned comfort. You could argue that the Kayano is a more stable spin on the neutral Nimbus, built for a similar purpose but with extra stability features and a firmer edge, to provide extra support and prevent overpronation. But the Kayano 32 stabilisation is quite subtle.
Read on to find out in my ASICS Gel Kayano 32 vs ASICS Gel Nimbus 27 comparison.
If you click, or buy from, links on this page, we may receive compensation. Learn more
Now that they carry the same price tag, how do you find the best cushioned daily trainer for your running needs? Read on to find out in my ASICS Gel Kayano 32 vs ASICS Gel Nimbus 27 review.
Stack Height, Drop, Weight and Price
First up the key details and the ASICS Gel Kayano 32 now has 2mm extra foam under the forefoot. The stack height now sits at 40mm in the heel and 32mm in the forefoot for an 8mm drop.
Meanwhile, the ASICS Gel Nimbus 27 also now packs more foam underfoot. It’s stack rises to 43.5mm in the heel and 35.5mm in the forefoot, also for a 8mm drop.
When it comes to weight, in my US size 9.5 test, the Kayano 32 and the Nimbus 27 both tip the scales around 10.7oz or 10.8oz. There’s a few grams between them but essentially they weigh the same on the foot.
With the Nimbus 27 price creeping up five bucks over the previous-gen shoe, the ASICS Gel Kayano 32 and the Gel Nimbus 27 both now come in at $165.
Stats
ASICS | Nimbus 27 | Kayano 32 |
|---|---|---|
Best for | Daily miles | Daily miles |
Support | Neutral | Stability |
Cushion | Max cushioning | Max cushioning |
Stack Height | 43.5mm heel 35.5mm forefoot | 40mm heel 32mm forefoot |
Drop | 8mm | 8mm |
Weight | 10.8oz / 306g | 10.7oz / 303g |
Suggested Retail Price | $165 | $165 |
Fit | True to size | True to size |
Rating | 8.5/ 10 | 8.3/ 10 |
Design
Like the past-gen shoes, the Nimbus 27 and the Kayano 32 still share some of the same design DNA.
The Gel Nimbus 27 and the Gel Kayano 32 follow a similar midsole set up with the same combination of super soft FlyteFoam Blast Plus foam and PureGEL technology heel inserts – essentially some springy, rebounding material at the heel – to create softer, more cushioned landings and soak up more impact.
Despite the 2mm extra under the forefoot, the Kayano 32 stills has a lower midsole stack – with 3.5mm less foam across the shoe. That smaller stack helps to maintain the important stability.
The Kayano 32 also features ASICS’ 4D Guidance System, a combination of elements designed to support the foot each time it hits the ground for better stability. This includes a more pronounced heel bevel, a sculpted midsole, and additional medial foam that guides your foot on landing.
Up top, the both ASICS shoes have nicely premium mesh uppers. The Nimbus 27 has a new mesh upper that successfully balances breathability with a snug, supportive fit. The Kayano 32 has a single-layer set-up with some perforations that aim to boost the breathability.
The heel packages offer equal padding, though the Nimbus 27 has a higher heel collar section. The Kayano 32 now has thin, gusseted, flat, wrapping tongues much like the ASICS Novablast 5. But with some additional internal wrapping on the medial side to boost the support. The Nimbus 27’s tongues are also gusseted but opt for a knitted style that’s a bit more floppy and harder to get into place.
Both shoes carry generous coverings of updated hybrid ASICSGrip rubber that’s been tweaked to improve grip and durability. The grip patterns are different, with more grooves cut into the Kayano 32 and a noticeably thicker rubber, particularly in the heel impact zones.
Kayano 32
Shop Now at
Nimbus 27
Shop Now at
Fit
In testing, I ran in my regular ASICS shoe size – a US 9.5 in both shoes. You get excellent premium, plush comfort from the very first step in from the Kayano and the Nimbus. The big, padded heel collars hold securely, they’re easy to lace down for good midfoot security – though the knitted tongue of the Nimbus 27 has a shade more lace pinch protection than the flatter tongues on the Kayano 32.
The thicker uppers of the Kayano 32 also fit closer across the top of the toes and the forefoot for a marginally more snug and held feel. The Nimbus 27 has loads of space and wiggle room and benefits from some extra airiness.
But both shoes are happily accommodating and spacious and I’d recommend going true to size in the Kayano 32 and the Nimbus 27.
Performance
In testing, I’ve logged around 30 miles in both shoes. I mostly ran easy, low and slow but threw in the odd faster interval – a mile at a faster clip – to test the pace range and versatility. My longest run was 90 minutes – a good test for the longer-haul comfort.
As usual, my test miles were mainly on the road with the occasional excursion onto light off-road park and river paths to test stability. I also did a side-by-side mile, where I ran with one shoe on each foot, to get a better sense of the differences.
While you might use the Kayano 32 and the Nimbus 27 for similar runs – everything at the easier, slower end of the pace range – with these two latest generations, the major difference really is the softness and the extra little bit of energy coming back from the Nimbus 27.
It's notably more cushioned, more soft with a bit more movement underfoot because of that. The Kayano 32 still has a big wedge of cushion, but it feels quite firm. There’s a flat blockiness to it but that brings reliability and stability.
There’s notable extra softness in the Nimbus 27, particularly if you're landing further back on your heels where there’s much more compression. In the ASICS Gel Kayano 32, the landings are more controlled and everything feels flatter and a touch more uniform as you roll through. You can feel the additional guidance as you kick forward and toe off.
It's not overdone. When I'm running with two Kayanos on my feet, they still feel quite natural. But when you put them side by side, you really see how pronounced the extra Nimbus cushion is compared to the control you get underfoot from the Kayano.
When you're weighing up which of these shoes might suit you best, a big part of the decision will come down to whether you need more stability and more control or you like to feel a bit of firmness in that ride. If that’s the case, go for the Kayano 32.
If you want something that's tuned a bit softer, springer, with more energy coming back, the Nimbus 27 is the one. The Nimbus has good stability too but it’s not as supportive as the Kayano 32.
If you need more cushioning, because you tend to land further back towards the heel, there's also definitely more protection in the Nimbus 27 heel.
My Verdict
I would tend to use these shoes for the same kinds of runs. Everything from slow and easy, up to cruising and I’d likely limit the time on feet to 90 minutes. They're both quite heavy shoes and I’d want something lighter for long hauls.
As with the head to head between the previous generations of these shoes, this is going to come down to whether or not you really need that extra stability. I don't think the Nimbus 27 is unstable. It's a pretty wide shoe with a good platform—it's nicely reliable—but the Kayano is just bringing a bit more of that.
In terms of comfort on the foot, there’s very little to choose between them. They both fit well with similar heel packages. The uppers are roomier on the Nimbus 27 but everything feels kind of on par in terms of comfort.
So it's really going to come down to whether or not you want that extra stability element and a slightly firmer, slightly more controlled ride that you're going to get with the Kayanos.
If you don’t need much stability, there’s a bit of extra life to the Nimbus 27 that might make it more versatile for some. Fans of a softer ride will also prefer the Nimbus. If you need that guaranteed reliability underfoot, the subtle guidance of the Kayano 32 is the way to go.
For good stability alternatives to the Kayano 32, the Saucony Guide 18 and the Brooks Adrenalin GTS 24 are also good options.
For soft protective landings with a touch more uptempo ability, the Brooks Ghost Max 3, the new Saucony Ride 18 and New Balance 1080v14 are all worth alternatives. If you want big cushion, more energy in a lighter ASICS shoes, the Novablast 5 and the Cumulus 27 are also worth a look.
Leave a Reply