Asics GT 2000 9 Review
Matt: The GT 2000 series has been around for a long time (almost 30 years!). A
staple stability shoe among the masses, the GT 2000 9 returns dropping a
bit more weight and featuring a more refined upper. While still
featuring a medial post and a thick trussic system, the stability is
more adaptable and should work for a variety of runners. A classic
returns with subtle updates, all improvements.
Weight: 10.3 oz (men's size 9), 8.4 oz (women's size 8)
Stack Height: 29 mm / 19 mm
Drop: 10 mm
Classification: Moderate Stability Trainer
RUNNING SHOE SUMMARY
Matt: The classic Asics GT 2000 returns with a refined upper and a more
integrated yet still stable ride. The GT 2000 9 features a one piece
mesh upper featuring additional targeted areas of structure to stabilize
the foot. The sole features Duomax posting, Flytefoam and both rear and
forefoot gel inserts for a cushioned and stable ride. While the
slightly outdated Trusstic system still remains and rearfoot landings
are a bit stiff, the Asics GT 2000 9 continues to be a trusty, stable
and slightly lighter stability shoe that will carry those who need a
some guidance for many miles.
FIT (LENGTH / WIDTH / COMFORT)
Matt: The Asics GT 2000 9 fits true to size in my normal size 10 (mens). The
fit is slightly snug throughout although the mesh in the forefoot does
stretch with time. The forefoot mesh is somewhat stretchy and does adapt
to your footshape. The midfoot is fairly snug and the laces interact
very well with the one piece mesh, allowing you to customize how locked
down it is. The heel is very snug. There is a thick heel extensive heel
counter that sits wide and high. There is enough cushion around the heel
collar and internally that it has not given me any issues with pressure
on my calcaneus. However it is very snug and locks the heel in well.
Initially I almost thought it was too snug until the shoe started to
break in. The tongue is fairly average. I had no issues with slippage
and it stays locked in well. While the mesh is comfortable, there are enough reinforcements internally that I would not suggest wearing this shoe sockless.
PERFORMANCE (RIDE / SPEED)
Matt: The ride is plenty cushioned and runs stiff in the heel and midfoot with
decent flexibility in the forefoot. The deep forefoot flex grooves
provide a surprisingly smooth toe off. The midsole in the middle of soft and firm, providing great cushioning for longer miles but some nice pop when the pace picks up. At 10.3 oz for a men's size 9 and a
stiff snappy sole, the GT 2000 9 can move when necessary. I have used
this shoe for hill repeats and an uptempo run without issue. However, I would not use it for anything faster as the trusstic system begins to feel fairly clunky at any kind of faster paces. Thus, the Asics GT 2000 9 is best for easy miles, long runs, fartleks, uptempo runs and recovery runs. The lighter weight certainly makes it a bit more versatile for uptempo efforts, but the DS Trainer is a far better option for fast miles.
The ride as mentioned is stiff in the rear but smooth up front. There is a very slight heel bevel that is better than previous versions, but the midsole does flare posterior ever so slightly. This makes rearfoot landings a bit stiff, but certainly stable. The trusstic system is noticeable as a stiff transition over the midfoot. For those that like this, it still exists in the GT 2000 9. As you transition to the forefoot, everything opens up with deep flex grooves, providing a super smooth toe off. Those that land at the rearfoot will find a stiffer ride, while those landing up front will find a slightly softer but moderately flexible feel. Durability has been extremely good as I have almost 60 miles on my pair with only a tiny bit of wear at the posterior lateral heel and medial midfoot. The heel has broken in a bit, but the ride has remained fairly consistent. Thus I expect this shoe to last longer than the traditional 300-500 miles.
STABILITY
Matt: The Asics GT 2000 9 is a
moderate level stability shoe and provides a stable ride from
heel toe without being obtrusive. The Duomax medial post is integrated
very well into to the midsole despite being a traditional duel density post. The post is sloped though, which adjusts nicely to the amount of medial resistance needed. I did not notice the typical arch bump feeling from many medial posted shoes and found the ride fairly consistent. The forefoot is also very stable given how nicely it transitions forward. The stability comes mostly from the maintenance of forward moment in the right direction, although there is some mild medial and lateral sole flare that adds to this stability. Overall, the Asics GT 2000 9 is a very stable shoe without being intrusive. Everything is integrated fairly well, although the trusstic system is a bit stiff for me.
THOUGHTS AS A DPT / FOOTWEAR SCIENCE
Matt: The Asis GT 2000 9 is a great, classic stability shoe. The Duomax medial post is integrated very well into the midsole and I very much appreciate that in regards to pronation, Asics notes "this is a completely natural motion." Sometimes certain people just need a bit of guidance. What I would like to see improved is the heel bevel and the trusstic system.
I personally do not have a problem with a midfoot shank, but I do have an issue with non-full ground contact outsoles. I do understand this adds weight, but even filling in the lateral midfoot would smooth out the transition a great deal. There is a reason so many companies are moving toward full ground contact outsoles, the transition and ride is way smoother! Additionally, from a physics standpoint, the more contact you have, the more stable the shoe. Thus for a stability shoe, having more surface area makes sense for a stable ride I do understand this is a classic shoe, so changes must be done carefully. Clinically however I had a high number of patients come to me with plantarfascial or midfoot pain from an old pair of trusstic based shoes. Every time, the trusstic has worn out and an abnormal flex point is created in the midfoot where there should not be one. Instead of creating the area for potential failure, keep the trusstic to maintain rigidity but fill in a portion!
I have been very impressed with recent shoes from Asics in regards to heel design. The Kayano Lite (Review), Nimbus Lite 2 (Review), Metaracer (Review), Hyper Speed (Review) all have varying levels of a bevel integrated. I see no reason why this concept cannot be integrated further with other models. I continue to harp on this as the human heel is curved for a reason. We have discussed the heel rocker previously here, but it is one very important mechanism in the foot that not only makes human locomotion efficient, but also helps maintain forward moment during heel strike. A beveled heel can smooth out the ride at initial contact for heel striker. Not only does the ride smooth out, but it may reduce the load placed on tissues in the lower extremity. A rigid heel or even a posterior flare (posterior protrusion) may induce an early landing. The muscles of the lower extremity prime themselves during the final component of the swing phase (terminal swing where the limb is swinging forward to land), turning on prior to impact to get ready for it. A rigid heel or even posterior flare design not only reduces the smoothness, but may induce an impact into the lower extremity prior to the active shock absorbers being ready (muscles). Thus you get more passive shock absorption through tissues like the bones, ligaments, cartilage etc. Some shock absorption through those structures are normal, but if you can reduce it or even spread it out, that is optimal. For more on this, read our Footwear Science section on Posterior Heel Flare and Heel Bevels.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Matt: Making recommendations on such a stable shoe is challenging. From a biomechanics perspective I can say one thing, but I also understand from a marketing perspective, a large population of people have stayed true to this shoe for years. So drastic changes might upset people. However, I challenge Asics, to reconsider the design of the Trusstic system. Don't necessarily get rid of it, but may make the lateral midfoot full ground contact. This has been done successfully with many other trainers both from Asics and other companies, which may be a great middle ground to meet in regards to full ground contact outsoles vs the trusstic concept. This may help smooth out the ride. Additionally, stability shoes should be full ground contact or at least have as much contact as possible as more surface area contact is inherently more stable. I would also like to see a little more bevel at the heel. Seeing shoes like the Lite versions (Kayano and Nimbus) add some of this in as well as watching the Metaracer and Hyperspeed have jaw dropping amounts makes me want to see Asics continue to integrate this concept. Even into staples like the GT 2000 series. This will drastically help improve transitions at the rearfoot for heel strikers.
WHO THIS SHOE IS FOR (Conclusion)
Matt: The Asics GT 2000 9 is a moderate stability shoe for those looking for a snugger fitting lighter weight trainer with a more traditional ride and methods of stability. At 9.9 oz, the GT 2000 9 is light and can move when necessary. The Duomax support provides very well integrated stability in the rearfoot and midfoot. The trusstic system provides a high level of stiffness in the midfoot for those who want that. The fit is medium to snug, so those with a bit more narrow feet will feel at home here. The forefoot is incredible smooth, so those who want a nice roll through at the forefoot should definitely give the GT 2000 9 a look!
GRADING (SHOE CATEGORY)
Matt
Fit: B+ (Snug secure fit. Good flexibility in forefoot mesh. Heel counter noticable and rearfoot a bit stiff until the shoe breaks in.)
Performance: B+ (Great forefoot flexibility, lighter weight, but stiffer ride through rearfoot)
Stability: A (Very well integrated posting. Stable throughout length of shoe but not intrusive)
DPT/Footwear Science: B- (Points for grading the duomax and making it incredible smooth. Minus points for continued lack of heel bevel, lack of full ground contact outsole and stiffness from trusstic system)
Personal: B- (I really want to like this shoe more, but the stiff heel in regards to the sole and upper limits how much I enjoy the shoe. Definitely a classic shoe that has a great amount of potential for continued growth)
Overall: B (A classic shoe for those who want it. A lighter stability shoe that will not disappoint long time fans)
Thanks for reading!
Interested in a pair of ASICS GT 2000 9? Visit Running Warehouse here or Fleet Feet here.
Using the link helps support our work at Doctors of Running! Thank you so much.
FURTHER READING:
Compare
Asics Kayano Lite - The brand's modern take on stability, and editor's pick of the year for stability in 2020
Saucony Guide 14 - Clean new update on their stability version of the Ride at Saucony
New at Doctors of Running
Podcast EP. 32 - Saucony Hurricane 23 Review
Asics Hyper Speed
Hoka One One Arahi 5
TESTER PROFILES:
Dr. Matthew Klein is a 140 lb male with notable PRs of 14:45 for 5k and
2:32:44 for the full marathon. He typically runs 70-100 miles per week
and trains at a variety of paces from 8min per mile recovery runs to
4:40 per mile 1k repeats. He prefers firmer and responsive shoes with
snug heels and medium to wide toe boxes. He is particular to less
cushioned shoes and close to the ground shoes, but can handle a little
cushion when he gets beat up. IG handle @kleinrunsdpt
Doctor of Physical Therapy
