ASICS Sonicblast 2: análisis y review

The ASICS Sonicblast 2 is an excellent option for:

• Runners who prioritize maximum shock absorption and want plenty of cushioning underfoot.
• Those looking for a super trainer without spending over €210.
• Midfoot and forefoot strikers who can make the most of its bouncy trampoline pod.
• Runners seeking an ultra-cushioned shoe that also works for daily training.

The Sonicblast 2 could use a bit more bounce, especially in the heel. In our view, runners who prioritize cutting-edge foam technology and maximum energy return may find it falls short of expectations. Instead, we believe it's worth spending a little extra on the ASICS Megablast or Saucony Paramount Max.

We also think that runners who need extra support should avoid the Sonicblast 2, as it's clearly designed for neutral runners. For those seeking a more stable ride, we believe the ASICS Superblast 3 is a much better alternative.

The Sonicblast 2 is built either for high-mileage training or for heavier runners, and its shock absorption fully reflects that. ASICS combines two foams with a substantial stack, but we wanted to know how much impact protection it actually delivers.

We measured an excellent 157 SA in the heel and an even more impressive 141 SA in the forefoot, both clearly above average. This makes the Sonicblast 2 particularly appealing for long runs, including for runners who land farther forward and don't want to sacrifice cushioning.

ASICS has changed a bit the midsole to add a trampoline pod beneath the forefoot, promising a more energetic ride than the original Sonicblast. However, despite all the marketing hype, our lab tests revealed similar energy return.

Our machine recorded 68.7% in the forefoot, closely matching the original Sonicblast. Meanwhile, the heel delivered a disappointing 60.3%, much lower than its predecessor. But should we be surprised? After cutting the shoe in half, we found more FF Blast Max and less FF Turbo² in the heel, which explains the result.

The Sonicblast 2 looks enormous from the side, and ASICS officially lists a 46 mm stack height beneath the heel. However, our measurements revealed a slightly smaller figure.

We recorded 43.7 mm in the lab, still significantly higher than average and firmly in maximalist territory. It's an impressive amount of foam for a training shoe intended to handle faster sessions, and runners who prefer a grounded, low-profile feel will find this setup far away from that experience.

We measured 36.2 mm of forefoot stack with our calipers, which is insane. That's an exceptionally tall forefoot stack, giving runners a massive layer of front cushioning.

And here's another detail worth pointing out: ASICS has once again taken the same approach to marketing its foam setup. The brand advertises FF Turbo² in the forefoot (and yes, it's definitely there), but makes no mention of FF Blast Max. In our view, that's a bit misleading, isn't it?

ASICS advertises an 8 mm heel-to-toe drop for the Sonicblast 2, and our findings were very close to the official figure. We measured 7.5 mm following the guidelines of World Athletics, as we always do. In our opinion, this moderate drop gives the shoe a broadly familiar geometry and works for all footstrikes.

You can also use our photo to see the distribution of FF Turbo² (top) and FF Blast Max (bottom). Notice how there's significantly more FF Blast Max in the heel, which helps explain the lower energy return we measured in that area.

The Sonicblast 2 combines FF Turbo² with FF Blast Max, and our testing confirmed that these two layers have distinct levels of softness.

We measured a plush 31.1 AC in the softer section, while the second foam registered 38.2 AC, close to average. And even better, after our freezer test, the foam became only 7% firmer, showing excellent resistance to changes in softness when temperatures drop.

One of the most noticeable changes from the original Sonicblast is the redesigned heel bevel. ASICS has given the rear a more rounded shape while retaining a pronounced forefoot rocker to compensate for the massive stack height. However, we also noticed that the toe spring is now a few millimeters lower.

ASICS has completely redesigned the ASTROPLATE for the Sonicblast 2. The new version takes inspiration from trail running shoes, featuring a forked forefoot that leaves space in the center for the trampoline pod we discussed earlier.

Interestingly, ASICS continues to avoid carbon fiber, which we see as a smart decision. The more flexible plate allows for a less rigid, more natural ride, making the Sonicblast 2 better suited for daily runs rather than just faster training sessions.

The standout addition to the Sonicblast 2 is the dedicated FF Turbo² trampoline pod beneath the forefoot. It takes inspiration from the design we've seen in the Novablast series for years, but pushes the concept even further.

However, despite this feature, we found that the bounce still falls one step behind the very best super trainers. While the trampoline-inspired setup certainly looks impressive and it's cool from a marketing perspective, the Sonicblast 2 still has room for improvement in energy return.

The Sonicblast 2's redesigned engineered mesh upper looks streamlined, but our measurements show a more generous forefoot fit than its appearance leads us to expect.

After making our gel mold, we measured 97.4 mm at the widest part of the forefoot, slightly above average and a huge jump from the 92.8 mm of version 1.

Even though the forefoot is fairly spacious at its widest point, the front narrows noticeably toward the big toe.

We measured a toebox width of 71.3 mm, confirming a noticeably tapered design that favors runners who prefer a snug, secure fit around the toes, especially during faster efforts. Furthermore, this tapered shape is classic ASICS, so we weren't surprised by the result.

Vertical toe space is another important detail, especially in a shoe designed for faster running. The upper needs to provide a secure lockdown without putting too much pressure on the toes during longer efforts.

Using our gel mold, we measured a toebox height of 26.8 mm. In our view, this is a positive design that should accommodate most runners without feeling overly restrictive.

This is one area where the Sonicblast 2 leaves most competitors in the dust. The Japanese brand has been delivering exceptional traction lately, and this shoe continues that trend with its premium ASICSGRIP rubber outsole.

We recorded an outstanding friction coefficient of 0.92 in our SATRA TM144 traction test. In our view, this is one of the Sonicblast 2's biggest strengths, providing incredible grip on both dry and wet pavement.

ASICS covers much of the Sonicblast 2's forefoot with ASICSGRIP rubber, and we were pleased to find improved heel coverage compared to the original version. We initially worried that ASICS might reduce rubber coverage to save weight, but thankfully, that wasn't the case.

In our 30-degree bending test, we needed 17.2N of force, slightly above average but perfectly reasonable given the gargantuan midsole.

This is one of the biggest changes from its predecessor. In the original Sonicblast, we recorded 24.4N, making the shoe too stiff for many runners. Thankfully, ASICS has addressed that issue in version 2.

Despite its massive stack height, dual-foam midsole, and plate, ASICS has managed to keep the Sonicblast 2 surprisingly lightweight.

Our scale showed just 8.1 oz (230g), an impressive result for such an oversized shoe. Even better, we found a remarkable 10% weight reduction compared to its predecessor, an unexpected surprise that once again proves how good ASICS is at shedding weight without sacrificing cushioning.

We have no complaints about the Sonicblast 2's upper when it comes to breathability. After connecting our smoke-pumping machine to a custom 3D-printed attachment that directs airflow into the shoe, we were pleased with the result.

We awarded the Sonicblast 2 a solid 4/5 in our breathability test, making it a great option for year-round running. In our view, it should handle both winter and summer comfortably, as long as you choose socks that match the outside temperature.

The Sonicblast 2's massive stack height, soft foam and springy forefoot don't exactly sound like a recipe for stability. However, ASICS has added a few support-focused features, including a structured upper and a forked plate, to help keep the ride under control.

Even so, we firmly believe that the Sonicblast 2 is best suited for neutral runners. Its platform isn't as wide as those of other super trainers, and runners who need extra support should look elsewhere.

Unlike our bending test, this measurement reveals how much the shoe resists twisting along its length. Interestingly, despite its forked plate design, the Sonicblast 2 proved stiffer than average, recording 17.2 Nm in our torsional rigidity test.

ASICS has kept the Sonicblast 2's heel counter moderately structured rather than turning it into a rigid plastic shell. And we awarded it a 3/5 in our manual test, which is similar to most daily trainers.

The Sonicblast 2 looks big, but the forefoot platform isn't as oversized as the towering stack might lead you to expect.

We measured just 115.7 mm at the widest point of the forefoot. In our view, this is a smart move by ASICS, as it sets the Sonicblast 2 apart from the broader platforms found in other super trainers within its lineup, such as the Megablast and Superblast series.

The heel is proportionally wider than the forefoot compared to the average running shoe, but nothing extraordinary. At 94.4 mm, we actually consider it somewhat narrow for a shoe with such a towering stack height.

The engineered mesh upper is one of the Sonicblast 2's most important updates, particularly for ventilation and reducing weight. Unfortunately, our abrasion test revealed a clear compromise with a 2/5 score.

After the underwhelming toebox result, we moved our Dremel to the heel. This time, the Sonicblast 2 performed brilliantly and got our maximum rating with 5/5.

The ASICSGRIP outsole impressed us with its exceptional traction, but we also wanted to see how its rubber would stand up to abrasion. After all, amazing grip means little if the outsole wears out too quickly, right?

Our Dremel test left an indentation of just 0.9 mm, a solid result that suggests good wear resistance. In our view, that's especially important for a versatile shoe like the Sonicblast 2, which many runners will use for both tempo sessions and daily training.

Despite the weight reduction, we found that ASICS actually increased the outsole rubber thickness, which is particularly impressive.

Our measurements revealed 2.2 mm, up from 2.0 mm in the original Sonicblast.

There's nothing remarkable about the insole thickness, as ASICS opted for a standard 4.8 mm design that falls within the usual 4 to 5 mm range.

The insole can be removed in seconds, although replacing it means losing the bathtub-like design that provides a bit of extra stability.

One feature missing from the Sonicblast 2 is reflective detailing. We inspected the shoe and found no reflective elements.

The Sonicblast 2 retains the traditional lacing system of its predecessor, featuring flat laces threaded through reinforced punched eyelets. We found that this simple setup provides a secure, reliable lockdown.

Interestingly, ASICS managed to reduce the shoe's weight while offering decent tongue comfort. We found two foam pads measuring 3.2 mm thick, which we consider quite an achievement for the Sonicblast 2.

ASICS has given the Sonicblast 2 a semi-gusseted tongue, with thin attachments on both sides that help hold the tongue in place.

Instead of a separate pull loop, ASICS uses an extended heel collar on the Sonicblast 2. The raised rear section gives runners a point to grip when putting the shoe on without adding another component and contributes to the successful weight loss of this shoe.

The Sonicblast 2 costs €10 more than its predecessor, which isn't the direction we hoped for. That's especially disappointing in a market packed with increasingly capable super trainers, particularly when the shoe doesn't deliver any meaningful improvement in energy return.

However, ASICS has introduced some genuine upgrades, including a much lighter build, a redesigned forefoot pod, and an improved upper. Our lab tests also confirmed excellent cushioning and outstanding traction, so we believe the final price is still justified.