ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31  Running Shoe Review

Review updated Oct 20, 2025 at 03:31pm
Test bench update May 05, 2026 at 03:48pm
Tested using Methodology v0.11 
ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31

Track

5.2
Marathon Racing 
4.7
5K/10K Racing 
4.6
Responsiveness 
7.1
Cushioning 
7.7
Lateral Stability 
9.5
True To Size 

Track

 0
Notice: This running shoes was replaced by ASICS GEL-KAYANO 32

The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 is one of the longest-running (pun intended) models in the ASICS lineup, having undergone many transformations since the early '90s. This 31st iteration is a premium stability shoe intended for daily training. Like its predecessor, it uses ASICS' relatively new 4D Guidance System, which promises adaptive stability as you run, making use of support elements that include a foam-based midfoot block for arch support and a wider overall platform. This is a large, heavy shoe with a high stack height, but it's a good fit for heavier runners or runners needing a supportive daily trainer.

Our Verdict

5.2
Marathon Racing 

The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 isn't meant for marathon racing. As a supportive daily trainer, it's not great for picking up the pace. It has bad overall energy return and a heavy weight that you'll feel in the longer distances of a marathon.

Pros
  • Feels well-cushioned underfoot.

Cons
  • Bad energy return.

  • Heavy.

4.7
5K/10K Racing 

The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 isn't the best choice for 5K/10K racing. Its heavy weight and bulk aren't designed for faster speeds over shorter distances.

Pros
None
Cons
  • Bad energy return.

  • Heavy.

4.6
Responsiveness 

The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 delivers terrible energy return. The midsole foam isn't soft or responsive enough to prevent excessive energy loss, and the shoe doesn't provide the bouncy, responsive ride needed for faster paces.

Pros
None
Cons
  • Bad energy return.

7.1
Cushioning 

The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 offers decent cushioning overall, but that obscures differences between the front and rear of the midsole. Impact absorption is more limited in the forefoot, while the heel, fitted with a PureGEL insert, provides good cushioning and protection underfoot, especially for heavier runners.

Pros
  • Good protection under the heel at higher forces.

Cons
  • Forefoot cushioning is more limited.

7.7
Lateral Stability 

The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 has good lateral stability. The remarkably wide outsole creates a stable platform, and this shoe uses support elements like a harder foam block in the midfoot for arch support. Though its high stack height lifts you farther off the ground, the firmness of the foam, especially in the forefoot, makes for a very controlled ride.

Pros
  • Wide outsole provides a stable platform.

  • 4D Guidance System includes elements like a stiff block of foam in the midfoot.

  • Foam is very firm overall.

Cons
  • High stack.

9.5
True To Size 
  • 5.2
    Marathon Racing
  • 4.7
    5K/10K Racing

  • Performance Usages

  • 4.6
    Responsiveness
  • 7.1
    Cushioning
  • 7.7
    Lateral Stability
  • 9.5
    True To Size
  • Changelog

    1.  Updated May 05, 2026: We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.11, adding two new rocker measurements to the Design section, and three new responsiveness tests to the Performance section. The Energy Return usage score has been replaced with Responsiveness. Check out the details in our changelog.
    2.  Updated Apr 29, 2026: We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.10, adding a new set of fit tests to the Design section and an overall fit performance usage. Check out the details in our changelog.
    3.  Updated Apr 13, 2026: We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.9, which adds a Forefoot Long Run Cushioning test to our performance section. Read more in our changelog.
    4.  Updated Oct 20, 2025: 

      We've adjusted this review's writing to align with the new test bench, including updates to all usage scores, and test boxes for Cushioning, Firmness, and Energy Return.

    Differences Between Sizes And Variants

    We bought and tested the ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 in men's US size 9, as noted on the label. The pair we purchased is the Digital Aqua/Bright Cyan colorway, but you can also buy the shoe in a wide range of colors, depending on the region. The men's variant ranges from Black/White and Black/Black to Blue Expanse/Digital Aqua and Indigo Blue/Gunmetal, while the women's variant includes colors like Cool Matcha/Light Celadon and Black/Bold Magenta, among others.

    There's also a LITE-SHOW variant with reflective glow-in-the-dark elements to increase visibility at night and a PLATINUM variant with metallic accents based on Shibori dyeing techniques.

    You can buy this shoe in narrow, regular, wide, or extra wide widths.

    Popular Running Shoe Comparisons

    The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 is a premium stability shoe. It's a great daily trainer for overpronators, with non-intrusive support elements and high-stack cushioning. However, this isn't the shoe to get if you're looking for a lightweight option for speedwork. The brand also offers the ASICS GEL-NIMBUS 27, a premium daily trainer that focuses on impact protection and cushioning.

    See our recommendations for the best running shoes to find the perfect model for your needs.

    Nike Structure 26

    Track

    The Nike Structure 26 and ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 are two classic stability shoes that are among their respective brands' oldest series. The GEL-KAYANO 31 has more stability-focused design elements, including a harder block of foam in the midfoot for arch support, and a softer pod of foam on the lateral side, designed to spring over-pronators back into a more neutral position; the Structure 26 meanwhile mostly relies on guide rails on both sides of the shoe to stabilise the foot. The ASICS shoe is heavier and higher stacked than the Nike shoe, with much worse energy return.

    ASICS GEL-KAYANO 32

    Track

    The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 32 and the ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 are both support trainers designed for runners who need guidance and protection, but the updates in the 32 make it a noticeably more approachable shoe. The 31 is slightly lighter on foot, but it feels firmer and harsher under load. The new geometry in the KAYANO 32, featuring a higher forefoot stack and a lower drop, creates a more balanced and protective ride that accommodates more stride types (rather than only pure heel strikers) without sacrificing the shoe's core support function. That said, both versions remain heavy, bottom-loaded shoes that feel more tank-like than nimble, and runners seeking a livelier or more responsive ride may still find it too sluggish for anything beyond easy or recovery efforts.

    ASICS NOVABLAST 4

    Track

    The ASICS NOVABLAST 4 is a more well-rounded shoe than the ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31. It's significantly lighter and uses more responsive foam, making it better for faster paces. It isn't as stable as the GEL-KAYANO 31, which is a better fit for heavier runners or those who need support elements.

    ASICS GEL-NIMBUS 26

    Track

    The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 and ASICS GEL-NIMBUS 26 are both popular and long-standing models in ASICS' lineup, but they suit different needs. The GEL-KAYANO 31 is aimed at runners who need more stability, with dedicated support elements and a slightly wider outsole. The GEL-NIMBUS 26, on the other hand, is a more neutral daily trainer designed for maximum comfort, with a slightly higher stack height and more balanced cushioning in the heel and forefoot.

    Show more 
    How We Test Running Shoes
    How We Test Running Shoes

    We buy and test running shoes with a very data-oriented approach. While we're just getting started, our methodology already has dozens of tests to help you make the right purchasing decision for your needs. Not only do we use high-end equipment to gather objective data, but we also order multiple sizes of the same shoes so team members can log in miles. This real-world testing is conducted at various paces and conditions, across different types of workouts, to cover all the bases. This allows us to verify our results and ensure they align with what you might feel with a specific pair.

    Test Results

    perceptual testing image
    Sort:
    RATINGS
    Category:
    All
    Design
    4.0
    Weight
    Weight
    308.4 g (10.88 oz)

    The ASICS GEL-KAYANO 31 is a very heavy shoe, making it inefficient for speedwork and racing.

    Stack Heights
    Heel Stack Height
    42.2 mm
    Forefoot Stack Height
    31.3 mm
    Heel-To-Toe Drop
    10.9 mm
    Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
    10.0 mm

    The shoe's PureGEL midsole insert was displaced when cutting it, but we've included a picture of the PureGEL beneath the shoe so you can see what it looks like.

    External Shape
    Outsole Heel Width
    95 mm (3.7")
    Outsole Arch Width
    84 mm (3.3")
    Outsole Forefoot Width
    117 mm (4.6")
    Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio
    2.25
    Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio
    3.73
    Internal Shape
    Internal Length
    279 mm (11.0")
    Internal Heel Width
    66 mm (2.6")
    Internal Forefoot Width
    96 mm (3.8")
    Wide Sizing Available
    Yes

    Like most ASICS shoes, this one runs quite long, so keep this in mind when selecting your size.

    8.8
    Forefoot Fit: Width
    Ball-Of-Foot TTS Deviation
    4.5 mm (0.178")
    Toe TTS Deviation
    3.2 mm (0.126")
    7.9
    Forefoot Fit: Height
    Toe TTS Deviation
    -2.6 mm (-0.101")
    9.9
    Arch Fit: Width
    Arch Width TTS Deviation
    1.1 mm (0.042")
    10
    Length Fit
    6.7
    Heel Rocker Geometry
    Heel Spring
    17 mm (0.7")
    Heel Apex Position
    15.3%
    Heel Rocker Angle
    20.7°
    6.8
    Forefoot Rocker Geometry
    Toe Spring
    47 mm (1.9")
    Toe Apex Position
    66.1%
    Forefoot Rocker Angle
    25.2°
    Other Features
    Tongue Gusset Type
    Fully-gusseted
    Plate
    None
    Performance
    1.6
    Heel Compression Energy Return
    Heel Energy Return
    66.8%

    The heel doesn't return a lot of energy. The shoe's firmer foam absorbs a lot of impact, resulting in high energy loss, meaning that the GEL-KAYANO 31 lacks the propulsive feel of high-performance racers.

    1.3
    Forefoot Compression Energy Return
    Forefoot Energy Return
    65.7%

    The forefoot has similarly bad energy return. Ultimately, this shoe doesn't provide a very bouncy experience due to the firmness of its foam.

    7.6
    Heel Cushioning
    Energy Absorbed At 550N
    3.20 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1100N
    9.25 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1900N
    16.85 J

    The heel offers good cushioning overall. It can provide underfoot protection for heel strikers and heavier runners, but if you're looking for a very plush and pillowy experience, look towards true max-cushioned shoes like the Mizuno Neo Vista 2.

    6.6
    Forefoot Cushioning
    Energy Absorbed At 800N
    3.74 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1300N
    7.11 J
    Energy Absorbed At 2050N
    11.05 J

    Unlike the heel, the forefoot doesn't provide the same level of cushioning, so the experience isn't as soft and protected under the forefoot.

    5.1
    Heel Firmness
    Firmness At 550N
    53.0 N/mm
    Firmness At 1100N
    103.6 N/mm
    Firmness At 1900N
    198.1 N/mm

    The heel is fairly firm. Lighter runners and forefoot strikers are more likely to feel that firmness, providing some stability. However, there's more give at higher forces, making for a softer landing in the heel if you're on the heavier side.

    8.0
    Forefoot Firmness
    Firmness At 800N
    113.7 N/mm
    Firmness At 1300N
    209.5 N/mm
    Firmness At 2050N
    392.1 N/mm

    The forefoot, meanwhile, is incredibly firm. That makes for a very stable ride, creating a rigid platform for toe-offs. However, runners who prefer a soft, forgiving landing might find the forefoot too rigid.

    6.1
    Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
    Energy Absorbed At 10km
    6.67 J
    Energy Absorbed At 20km
    6.52 J
    Energy Absorbed At 30km
    6.44 J
    Energy Absorbed At 40km
    6.39 J
    6.1
    Rocker Stiffness
    Force To Flatten The Rocker
    63 N
    3.7
    Forefoot Bending Energy Return
    Forefoot Bending Energy Return
    52.3%
    7.2
    Forefoot Bending Stiffness
    Forefoot Bending Stiffness
    10.5 N/mm
    Forefoot Bending Force
    348 N