Brooks Ravenna 6 vs. ASICS GT-2000 3 review

Brooks Ravenna 6 strikes a good balance between support, cushioning, and a smooth ride. ASICS GT-2000 3 delivers a plush ride with lots of protection from the road...

NEW! Brooks Ravenna 8 vs. ASICS GT-2000 5 and Brooks Ravenna 9 vs. ASICS GT-2000 6

The Brooks Ravenna 6 and the ASICS GT-2000 3 are stability running shoes that are meant to provide overpronators with a moderate amount of support and stability, so they should match up well against each other.


The Brooks Ravenna 6 and the ASICS GT-2000 3 are very similar in that they both pull the main overlays that are meant to provide support backward to really open up the forefoot and give you a comfortable fit in that area.

Both have overlays that run over the toe box, but the toe box overlays on the Brooks Ravenna 6 are relatively light compared to the overlays that wrap the midfoot.

In addition, a lot of the overlays on both the Brooks Ravenna 6 and the ASICS GT-2000 3 are no-sew, which means that they should give you a comfortable fit without many irritation points.

However, no-sew overlays tend to be less supportive than traditional stitched-on overlays. So for added support, the ASICS GT-2000 3 has traditional stitched-on overlays on the medial side of the shoe where you tend to need the most support as an overpronator.

And the Brooks Ravenna 6 has an adjustable band that connects the top of the saddle to the midsole, so that you can lock down your foot using these bands.

The ASICS GT-2000 3 also throws in an external heel counter to provide more support behind the heel. While the Brooks Ravenna 6 does not have such a heel counter, you can rest assured that you will get enough support behind the heel, since there is internal support there.

So all in all, you should be able to get a good amount of support from the upper of either running shoe.

The midsoles of the ASICS GT-2000 3 and the Brooks Ravenna 6 differ in technologies used with the ASICS GT-2000 3 having a FluidRide midsole that provides heel-to-toe cushioning and the Brooks Ravenna 6 having a BioMoGo DNA midsole to do the same.

However, the ASICS GT-2000 3 throws in GEL cushioning in both the heel and the forefoot to soften your ride a bit more, so not surprisingly, running shoe lab tests show that the ASICS GT-2000 3 is more cushy than the Brooks Ravenna 6 in general for both men and women.

The Brooks Ravenna 6 turns out to be just a tad more cushy in the heel for men. For women, the ASICS GT-2000 3 offers about 30% more cushioning than the Brooks Ravenna 6. But this is not surprising, since the ASICS GT-2000 3 also has a thicker midsole than the Brooks Ravenna 6.

Similarities in the two running shoes continue in the form of a piece of firmer foam on the medial side of the midsole that controls overpronation and a midfoot shank to provide reinforcement.

This should help the feet of overpronators to stop rolling too far inward after heel-strike. Speaking of heel-strike, the Brooks Ravenna 6 has a crash pad under the heel to soften your landings. In the ASICS GT-2000 3, the GEL cushioning takes care of that.

The outsoles of the two running shoes provide good separation between their rubber compartments for good shock absorption and dissipation, especially under the heel.

They also have a good amount of flex grooves in the forefoot for flexibility. However, the flex grooves of the ASICS GT-2000 3 may be slightly more advantageously placed, since it turns out to be the more flexible running shoe of the two.

But then with the good ground contact provided by the Brooks Ravenna 6 especially under the midfoot where the rearfoot joins the forefoot, you can expect to get a somewhat smoother ride from the Brooks Ravenna 6 than from the ASICS GT-2000 3.

The women's version of the Brooks Ravenna 6 weighs approximately 9.1 oz (258 grams), while the ASICS GT-2000 3 for women also weighs approximately 9.1 oz (258 grams). The men's version of the Brooks Ravenna 6 weighs about 11.3 oz (320 grams), and the ASICS GT-2000 3 for men also weighs 11.1 oz (315 grams).

The ASICS GT-2000 3 and the Brooks Ravenna 6 look very similar in what they have to offer to overpronators. You could go with either running shoe where the about of support and stability is concerned.

The decision point will probably lie in the amount of cushioning you desire. If you want lots of cushioning and protection from the road, the ASICS GT-2000 3 may do a better job than the Brooks Ravenna 6.

Note: The weight of a running shoe depends on the size of the running shoe, so any weights mentioned in this review may differ from the weight of the running shoe you choose to wear. Running shoes of the same size were compared for this review.

The two links above will take you to where you can read more about the running shoes.

This review falls under: ASICS | Brooks

Disclaimer: This running shoe review on is based on personal research and analysis of data that has been made publicly available by running shoe manufacturers and other companies that are dedicated to serving runners, and is not claimed to be accurate, complete, or up to date. While the information presented in this review is intended to help you better understand the differences between running shoes, we shall not be held liable for any purchasing decisions you make based on this information. Please use your own good judgment before making a purchase. The owner of this website receives a small compensation whenever you buy a product after clicking a product link on this website. Read our full disclaimer and privacy policy.