Products
Tested using Methodology v0.12
Updated Jul 16, 2026 05:01 PM
SEE PRICE
Amazon
Tested using Methodology v0.14
Updated Jul 21, 2026 12:48 PM
SEE PRICE
R.A.D
Heel Stack Height
42.5 mm
Weight
272.9 g (9.63 oz)
Heel-To-Toe Drop
6.4 mm
Plate
None
Heel Stack Height
39.8 mm
Weight
305.1 g (10.76 oz)
Heel-To-Toe Drop
9.1 mm
Plate
None
Our Verdict
ASICS GEL-NIMBUS 28
R.A.D MALLOW
The R.A.D MALLOW and ASICS GEL-NIMBUS 28 are both comfort-first daily trainers, but the ASICS is the more premium shoe. It’s lighter, much more protective, and better suited to longer efforts. However, the R.A.D is more energetic underfoot, slightly more stable, and retails for far less, making it the pick for runners looking for a great price-to-performance ratio who don't mind sacrificing some comfort for a bit more life beneath the feet.
Variants
- GEL-NIMBUS 28 (Arctic Blue/Velvet Purple - (Women - US 7))
- GEL-NIMBUS 28 (Black/Cobalt Burst - (Men - US 9))
- MALLOW (Solar Coral - (Women - US 7))
- MALLOW (Ultrablue - (Men - US 9))
Main Differences for
Half/Full Marathon Racing
Half/Full Marathon Racing
Threshold
Half/Full Marathon Racing
6.7
6.5
Forefoot Compression Energy Return
1.8
7.1
Weight
5.5
4.1
Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
8.3
6.9
Rocker Stiffness
8.4
5.1
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
3.9
5.3
Heel Compression Energy Return
1.0
6.2
Full Comparison
Design
Weight
5.5
4.1
Right Shoe Weight Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Left Shoe Weight Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Weight
272.9 g (9.63 oz)
305.1 g (10.76 oz)
Stack Heights
Stack Height Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Stack Height
42.5 mm
39.8 mm
Forefoot Stack Height
36.1 mm
30.7 mm
Heel-To-Toe Drop
6.4 mm
9.1 mm
Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
8.0 mm
8.0 mm
External Shape
3D Model Full Shoe
Preview 3D
Preview 3D
Outsole Heel Width
97 mm (3.8")
98 mm (3.9")
Outsole Arch Width
84 mm (3.3")
88 mm (3.5")
Outsole Forefoot Width
117 mm (4.6")
119 mm (4.7")
Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio
2.28
2.46
Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio
3.24
3.88
Internal Shape
3D Model Internal
Preview 3D
Preview 3D
Internal Length
278 mm (10.9")
277 mm (10.9")
Internal Heel Width
67 mm (2.6")
65 mm (2.6")
Internal Forefoot Width
96 mm (3.8")
90 mm (3.5")
Wide Sizing Available
Yes
No
Forefoot Fit: Width
8.8
9.2
Forefoot Width Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Ball-Of-Foot TTS Deviation
1.8 mm (0.072")
2.3 mm (0.091")
Toe TTS Deviation
-3.8 mm (-0.151")
-2.2 mm (-0.085")
Forefoot Fit: Height
5.3
5.0
Forefoot Height Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Toe TTS Deviation
-5.6 mm (-0.221")
-5.8 mm (-0.230")
Arch Fit: Width
7.3
9.3
Arch Fit Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Arch Width TTS Deviation
-4.3 mm (-0.169")
4.5 mm (0.176")
Length Fit
10
10
Toe Clearance Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Rocker Geometry
7.1
7.6
Heel Rocker Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Spring
32 mm (1.3")
23 mm (0.9")
Heel Apex Position
23.3%
21.4%
Heel Rocker Angle
15.2°
19.8°
Forefoot Rocker Geometry
7.7
6.2
Forefoot Rocker Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Toe Spring
55 mm (2.2")
43 mm (1.7")
Toe Apex Position
60.0%
64.9%
Forefoot Rocker Angle
24.6°
22.3°
Foam
Primary Foam Picture
Secondary Foam Picture
Primary Foam Name
SwellFoam
Primary Foam Type
EVA + OBC
Secondary Foam Name
N/A
Secondary Foam Type
N/A
Laces
Laces Picture
Lace Type
Flat
Width
7.0 mm (0.3")
Thickness
1.9 mm (0.1")
Stretch
20.0%
Other Features
Other Features Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Tongue Gusset Type
Fully-gusseted
Fully-gusseted
Plate
None
None
Performance
Heel Compression Energy Return
1.0
6.2
Heel Compression Video
Heel Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Heel Energy Return
64.7%
73.8%
Forefoot Compression Energy Return
1.8
7.1
Forefoot Compression Video
Forefoot Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Forefoot Energy Return
67.4%
76.5%
Heel Cushioning
8.2
7.6
Heel Cushioning Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 550N
3.43 J
3.52 J
Energy Absorbed At 1100N
10.28 J
9.23 J
Energy Absorbed At 1900N
18.03 J
15.90 J
Forefoot Cushioning
8.9
7.7
Forefoot Cushioning Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Forefoot Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 800N
5.43 J
4.77 J
Energy Absorbed At 1300N
9.95 J
8.24 J
Energy Absorbed At 2050N
15.38 J
12.15 J
Heel Firmness
8.1
7.6
Heel Firmness Graph
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Firmness At 550N
48.5 N/mm
40.7 N/mm
Firmness At 1100N
54.9 N/mm
53.1 N/mm
Firmness At 1900N
74.9 N/mm
75.0 N/mm
Forefoot Firmness
7.4
8.1
Forefoot Firmness Graph
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Firmness At 800N
56.9 N/mm
57.1 N/mm
Firmness At 1300N
70.4 N/mm
74.7 N/mm
Firmness At 2050N
94 N/mm
103 N/mm
Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
8.3
6.9
Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 10km
9.28 J
7.61 J
Energy Absorbed At 20km
9.07 J
7.33 J
Energy Absorbed At 30km
8.97 J
7.17 J
Energy Absorbed At 40km
8.88 J
7.04 J
Rocker Stiffness
8.4
5.1
Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Video
Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Graph
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Force To Flatten The Rocker
135 N
45 N
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
3.9
5.3
Forefoot Bending Video
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
53.0%
57.8%
Forefoot Bending Stiffness
7.8
7.3
Forefoot Bending Resistance Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Forefoot Bending Resistance
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Forefoot Bending Stiffness
15.5 N/mm
12.7 N/mm
Forefoot Bending Force
330 N
297 N
To access
Become a member
unlimited full product reviews,
product prices, and
other exclusive site features
ASICS GEL-NIMBUS 28
R.A.D MALLOW
Comments
ASICS GEL-NIMBUS 28 vs R.A.D MALLOW: Main Discussion
What do you think of these products? Let us know below.
Looking for a personalized buying advice from the RTINGS.com experts? Members have direct access to buying advice on our member forum.