Our verdict

For us, the ASICS GT 2000 13 is the Toyota Corolla of running shoes—it's always reliable but seldom delivers a thrilling experience. We found it masterfully combines stability, durability, comfort, and value, setting a benchmark few other brands can match. And despite minor issues like the redesigned tongue padding, this is the best GT 2000 yet!

Pros

  • Exceptionally durable
  • Reliable
  • Lighter than v12
  • Heel-striker optimised
  • Superior stability
  • Can handle walking too
  • All-around comfort
  • Softer FF Blast+ midsole
  • Ortholite plush insole

Cons

  • Not for speedy runs
  • Insufficiently padded tongue

Audience verdict

87
Great!

Who should buy

We've thoroughly tested the ASICS GT 2000 13 and we think it's a superb daily trainer for:

  • Those with moderate stability issues seeking subtle support to align their stride without feeling restricted.
  • Loyal fans of the GT 2000 series who buy each version—this one feels familiar but better.
  • Runners in need of a cushioned, durable, and stable daily trainer that’s built to last and is priced well below the Gel Kayano 31.

ASICS GT 2000 13

Who should NOT buy

In our view, the GT 2000 13 may not be the best option for forefoot strikers due to its high drop and the PureGEL technology in the heel. From our angle, the Hoka Arahi 7 and the Altra Paradigm 7 offer a more tailored mild-stability experience for this group of runners.

Additionally, we think the GT 2000 13 lacks the fun factor some runners seek. If that really matters to you, consider the ASICS Novablast 4 or the New Balance FuelCell Rebel v4—both of which are now more stable than ever and better suited for those seeking a blend of amusement and function.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Parts

Breathability

The GT 2000 is universally acknowledged as a reliably consistent shoe across all categories, and we are eager to begin our testing on a positive note.

We tested its performance using a smoke-pumping machine on the mesh upper and awarded it a 4/5. This score is our favourite one for daily trainers—it ensures enough summer ventilation and winter cosiness for comfort throughout the year.

Designed for stability, it was no surprise to us that ASICS restricted airflow to the toebox. They've reinforced the sides significantly compared to other models, enhancing side support and reducing lateral collapse.

ASICS GT 2000 13 microscope

Under our microscope, we discovered a run-of-the-mill engineered mesh without big ventilation holes. While larger holes could improve breathability, durability would likely decrease—a crucial aspect for GT 2000 buyers that expect long shelf life.

ASICS GT 2000 13 microscope 2

Overall, we found that the GT 2000 13 upper has adequate quality and padding. It lacks standout features but also avoids any major drawbacks, taking a no-risk design approach.

Test results
GT 2000 13 4
Average 3.8
Compared to 278 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Breathability
5

Durability

Toebox durability

Starting with its impressive breathability, we were eager to test if the lack of ventilation holes would yield the durable results we anticipate from the GT 2000 series.

Indeed, it did! We tested the engineered mesh upper with a Dremel and observed less wear-and-tear than usual, earning the shoe a solid 4/5 rating!

ASICS GT 2000 13 Toebox durability
Test results
GT 2000 13 4
Average 2.5
Compared to 212 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Toebox durability
5

Heel padding durability

But wait—things improve even more! For those who often wear out the Achilles tendon area of their running shoes, the GT 2000 13 proves to be a robust choice. We found it scored a 5/5 in our second Dremel test.

This is a superb result that promises an exceptionally long lifespan for the upper of the GT 2000 13.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Heel padding durability
Test results
GT 2000 13 5
Average 3.3
Compared to 208 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel padding durability
5

Outsole hardness

Turning our focus to the outsole, the Japanese brand adopts a cautious strategy here, tweaking the v12's design slightly by adding more rubber in wear-prone areas.

ASICS GT 2000 13 outsole rubber

Our tests showed a hardness of 82.1 HC, close to average—expected for a shoe designed with a no-risk approach, and suggesting it will be quite durable. And although we still think ASICS could have opted for ASICSGRIP—their top outsole—the AHAR+ rubber used performs sufficiently well.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Outsole hardness
Test results
GT 2000 13 82.1 HC
Average 80.1 HC
We use an average of four tests. The photo shows one of those tests.
Compared to 329 running shoes
Number of shoes
52.1 HC
Outsole hardness
93.0 HC

Outsole durability

It appears the GT 2000 13 is engineered to excel in durability tests, as it has triumphed in our Dremel challenges for the third consecutive time.

In our latest test, we noted only a minimal 0.4 mm dent in the outsole, underscoring its exceptional durability.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Outsole durability
Test results
GT 2000 13 0.4 mm
Average 1.0 mm
Compared to 190 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.0 mm
Outsole wear
2.0 mm

Outsole thickness

The GT 2000 13 demonstrates that brands can easily incorporate reflective elements into running shoes at minimal cost and without added weight—simply adding a small reflective piece on the heel is sufficient for us, as it significantly enhances visibility at night.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Outsole thickness
Test results
GT 2000 13 4.5 mm
Average 3.2 mm
Compared to 348 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.0 mm
Outsole thickness
6.6 mm

Weight

With its plush upper and substantial rubber, one might expect the GT 2000 13 to easily exceed the 10-oz mark, yet it doesn't.

We placed it on our kitchen scale and it registered at just 9.3 oz (264g)—a truly impressive figure for a durable daily trainer that also improves last year's model by 0.4 oz or about 10g.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Weight
Test results
GT 2000 13 9.31 oz (264g)
Average 9.35 oz (265g)
Compared to 349 running shoes
Number of shoes
5.26 oz (149g)
Weight
12.56 oz (356g)

Cushioning

Heel stack

And no, ASICS did not opt to reduce the shoe's thickness to make it lighter—they maintained the same 36.6-mm stack height in the heel, providing ample cushioning for most runners.

Additionally, the heel features the same PureGEL insert as its predecessor, which is especially advantageous for heavier individuals and enhances comfort during walking.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Heel stack
Test results
GT 2000 13 36.6 mm
Average 34.0 mm
Compared to 348 running shoes
Number of shoes
7.6 mm
Heel stack
46.3 mm

Forefoot stack

At 27.2 mm, the front of the shoe accommodates those who use a midfoot or forefoot striking technique, even during long-distance training. In fact, we believe that this shoe is ideal for anyone seeking enhanced stability during their medium to long easy runs, particularly in marathon training.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Forefoot stack
Test results
GT 2000 13 27.2 mm
Average 25.4 mm
Compared to 348 running shoes
Number of shoes
7.6 mm
Forefoot stack
37.1 mm

Drop

The difference between both measurements reveals a 9.4-mm heel-to-toe drop, placing it within the popular 8-to-10 mm range typical of most daily trainers. This design benefits all types of footstrikes, though we believe it works best for heel strikers.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Drop
Test results
GT 2000 13 9.4 mm
Average 8.6 mm
Compared to 348 running shoes
Number of shoes
-0.8 mm
Drop
16.1 mm

Insole thickness

We discovered the GT 2000 13 features a 5.1 mm insole, thicker than usual.

Notably, this isn't just any insole but the Ortholite X-55, a model often found in other high-end running shoes and that, as it's name suggest and the brand claims, returns 55% of energy on every stride, more than traditional EVA footbeds.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Insole thickness
Test results
GT 2000 13 5.1 mm
Average 4.5 mm
Compared to 344 running shoes
Number of shoes
1.5 mm
Insole thickness
7.3 mm

Midsole softness

Note: a low durometer measurement equals a soft material, whereas a high measurement means it's firm.

ASICS continues to use the FF Blast+ midsole found in many of their mid-tier shoes, like the Noosa Tri 16. This time, however, they've softened it to 18.5 HA from the 24.5 HA in the GT 2000 12.

While this isn't a drastic change, it was a necessary adjustment. We believe that while stability remains a priority for this shoe, the GT 2000's broad design allows for a more plush ride, which ASICS has now successfully delivered.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Midsole softness
Test results
GT 2000 13 18.5 HA
Average 20.9 HA
We use an average of four tests. The photo shows one of those tests.
Compared to 276 running shoes
Number of shoes
8.5 HA
Midsole softness (soft to firm)
41.5 HA

Midsole softness in cold (%)

Note: a low durometer measurement equals a soft material, whereas a high measurement means it's firm.

FF Blast+ is a mix of EVA and Olefin Block Co-Polymers (OBC), which improves the behaviour under cold temperatures. While EVA typically hardens noticeably in the cold, OBC maintains a more stable softness.

During our 20-minute freezer test, we discovered a 24.3% uptick—a result we view as quite favourable!

ASICS GT 2000 13 Difference in midsole softness in cold
Test results
GT 2000 13 24.3%
Average 25.5%
Compared to 275 running shoes
Number of shoes
0%
Midsole softness in cold
100%

PureGEL

PureGEL has become a common feature in ASICS's top-tier daily trainers, such as the Nimbus 26. This technology improves upon the older GEL, delivering enhanced comfort for heel strikers without the hefty weight of the previous materials.

ASICS GT 2000 13 PureGEL midsole
Please note that the PureGEL insert was removed for this photo.

Positioned just beneath the sockliner and atop the midsole, as shown in the picture above, it effectively enhances comfort for heel strikers. But honestly, it might go unnoticed by most runners if we didn't highlight it or if it wasn't featured in the midsole.

ASICS GT 2000 13 PureGEL

Rocker

Those seeking a classic ride will find the GT 2000 ideal, as ASICS maintains a non-rockered profile with just a slight toe-off aid at the forefoot end—nothing more.

ASICS GT 2000 13 toe spring

For those interested in a more rockered design, the market offers plenty of alternatives like the ASICS Superblast 2. However, with the GT 2000's longitudinal flexibility and moderate stack height, we believe this design approach is optimal.

Stability

Lateral stability test

The GT 2000 saga consistently delivers superb stability without being noticeable—offering just the right feel of balance without overwhelming.

ASICS GT 2000 13 3D

ASICS achieves this with their 3D Guidance System, which utilises a widened heel and high torsional rigidity to smooth out the ride, performing exactly as we expect from a mild-stability shoe.

In our testing, we confirmed that the design not only promises but delivers enhanced stability subtly—ideal for those who need a bit of support but prefer a natural feel underfoot.

Torsional rigidity

We previously noted the high torsional rigidity of the GT 2000, and ASICS has indeed increased it, achieving a top score of 5/5 in our manual tests—up from 4/5 in the GT 2000 12. This change might go unnoticed unless you're particularly attentive, as it is really subtle, and we had to twist both versions to really notice it.

However, it's important to understand that the GT 2000 lacks the flexibility typical of a neutral daily trainer, and that's fine for us. This rigidity provides enhanced stability, a major plus for this shoe, but it can also result in a less natural feel during runs.

Test results
GT 2000 13 5
Average 3.3
Compared to 327 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Torsional rigidity
5

Heel counter stiffness

The heel counter of the GT 2000 13 remains unchanged from last year, offering a firm structure that continues to serve heel strikers well and we rated at 4 out of 5.

Test results
GT 2000 13 4
Average 2.8
Compared to 311 running shoes
Number of shoes
1
Heel counter stiffness
5

Midsole width - forefoot

We've noted changes in the shoe's dimensions compared to last year's model—the forefoot is now narrower at 115.2 mm, typical of many daily trainers, down from 119.3 mm. While this adjustment might not favor forefoot strikers with stability needs, it does render the shoe more agile and lighter for most users.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Midsole width in the forefoot
Test results
GT 2000 13 115.2 mm
Average 114.1 mm
Compared to 349 running shoes
Number of shoes
100.5 mm
Midsole width - forefoot
127.9 mm

Midsole width - heel

ASICS has broadened the heel of this shoe to 102.2 mm, enhancing stability for heel strikers—who are the main target of this model.

This adjustment makes it one of the broadest heels in mild-stability daily trainers available today.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Midsole width in the heel
Test results
GT 2000 13 102.2 mm
Average 90.7 mm
Compared to 349 running shoes
Number of shoes
74.9 mm
Midsole width - heel
106.6 mm

Flexibility

Stiffness

We discovered that only 24.2N of force is required to bend the shoe to 90 degrees. This design effectively combines high torsional rigidity for enhanced support with longitudinal flexibility, which is what we seek in a GT 2000.

Test results
GT 2000 13 24.2N
Average 28.6N
We use an average of four tests. The video shows one of those tests.
Compared to 331 running shoes
Number of shoes
2.2N
Stiffness
94.4N

Stiffness in cold (%)

After retesting the GT 2000 13 following another 20-minute freeze, we were impressed by its performance—only becoming 6% stiffer. This minimal increase underscores its outstanding cold-weather resilience, making it a great choice for winter runners.

Test results
GT 2000 13 6%
Average 34.2%
Compared to 331 running shoes
Number of shoes
0%
Stiffness in cold
148%

Size and fit

Turning our focus to the outsole, the Japanese brand adopts a cautious strategy here, tweaking the v12's design slightly by adding more rubber in wear-prone areas.

ASICS GT 2000 13 outsole rubber

Our tests showed a hardness of 82.1 HC, close to average—expected for a shoe designed with a no-risk approach, and suggesting it will be quite durable. And although we still think ASICS could have opted for ASICSGRIP—their top outsole—the AHAR+ rubber used performs sufficiently well.

Toebox width - widest part

Discussing the fit, it measures a standard 99.2 mm in width, offering what we think it's a pretty much average fit overall.

We noticed less vertical volume compared to last year's model, but we think it's not an issue as the engineered mesh provides some stretch. To loosen it further, try stuffing newspaper balls inside the toebox before your next run—a classic runner's trick!

ASICS GT 2000 13 Toebox width at the widest part
Test results
GT 2000 13 99.2 mm
Average 98.4 mm
Compared to 349 running shoes
Number of shoes
89.5 mm
Toebox width - widest part
109.1 mm

Toebox width - big toe

We recorded a toe area width of 77.7 mm, perfectly aligning with our experience—it's neither spacious nor tight, simply average.

ASICS GT 2000 13 pov

ASICS offers good news for those needing a different fit: multiple widths are available in most regions, ranging from standard to extra wide, although availability may vary by country.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Toebox width at the big toe
Test results
GT 2000 13 77.7 mm
Average 78.3 mm
Compared to 223 running shoes
Number of shoes
60.4 mm
Toebox width - big toe
92.5 mm

Tongue: gusset type

Another notable feature of the GT 2000 13 is its semi-gusseted tongue, which enhances the lockdown as it's fixed to the sides. This is particularly crucial considering the redesigned tongue padding we discovered in this shoe...

ASICS GT 2000 13 Tongue: gusset type
Test results
GT 2000 13 Both sides (semi)

Comfort

Tongue padding

In the GT 2000 12, we found the 12.5-mm tongue excessively thick and even cumbersome. It seems ASICS took our feedback to heart, as they've now opted for a much slimmer 3.3-mm tongue, even thinner than what’s standard in training shoes.

ASICS GT 2000 13 lacing
Regular punched eyelets, a tongue loop, and some ventilation holes in the tongue—we like it!

While a tongue thickness of around 5 or 6 mm might be a better deal, we definitely prefer this streamlined version over last year's. It's also important to note that this reduction is a key factor in the overall weight reduction of the shoe.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Tongue padding
Test results
GT 2000 13 3.3 mm
Average 5.8 mm
Compared to 346 running shoes
Number of shoes
0.5 mm
Tongue padding
14.2 mm

Heel tab

The heel of the GT 2000 13 matches the rest of the shoe—functional but unsurprising. We found a standard finger-loop heel tab that effectively serves its purpose and appears durable enough to last the shoe's entire lifespan.

We also liked the small tweak that ASICS added to the heel collar, alleviating pressure on the Achilles tendon, somewhat similar to what Hoka does.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Heel tab
Test results
GT 2000 13 Finger loop

Removable insole

We easily removed the insole, which apart from reflecting the shoe's carbon footprint, is quite standard in terms of shape, allowing for hassle-free replacement.

ASICS GT 2000 13 Removable insole
Test results
GT 2000 13 Yes

Price

We've always considered the GT 2000 series well-priced for its value, and we're pleased to report that it hasn't seen an increase from the previous model, maintaining ASICS's recommended price tag—which is definitely great news in today's market.

Test results
GT 2000 13 $140
Compared to 349 running shoes
Number of shoes
£45
Price
£300

Misc

Reflective elements

The GT 2000 13 demonstrates that brands can easily incorporate reflective elements into running shoes at minimal cost and without added weight—simply adding a small reflective piece on the heel is sufficient for us, as it significantly enhances visibility at night.

Test results
GT 2000 13 Yes