ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 vs. Saucony Omni ISO review

ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 provides comfort and stability to moderate overpronators. Saucony Omni ISO delivers lots of stability and support to moderate to severe overpronators...

The ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 and the Saucony Omni ISO are stability running shoes for overpronators, but while the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 is listed as being for overpronators, the Saucony Omni ISO is listed as being for moderate to severe overpronators.

ADVERTISEMENTS

The uppers of the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 The preceding link takes you to Amazon.com and the Saucony Omni ISO The preceding link takes you to Amazon.com are similar in that they both come with a sturdy external counter at the back that locks your heel in to prevent ankle rotation and start the process of pronation control from within the upper.

The external heel counter of the Saucony Omni ISO is a bit smaller and does not wrap the top and bottom of the heel like that of the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25, so the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 delivers somewhat better support around the heel.

However, the Saucony Omni ISO comes with no-sew overlays around the midfoot, and the upper can be adjusted through the saddle to get a more personalized fit.

The ASICS GEL-Kayano 25, on the other hand, comes with an internal fit system of no-sew underlays that are meant to deliver support. This, together with the mesh, is meant to deliver a closer-to-foot fit.

Therefore, the Saucony Omni ISO delivers a bit more support around the midfoot than the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25, but the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 might deliver a better wrap around your entire midfoot and forefoot.

The forefoot of both running shoes is quite open and free from overlays, but because the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 has underlays running in and around the toe box, the Saucony Omni ISO might deliver more freedom of movement in the toe box and room to those who have big bunions.

All in all, both the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 and the Saucony Omni ISO should feel comfortable on your foot, but the Saucony Omni ISO is the one that delivers a good amount of support from midfoot to heel, while the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 increases its amount of support mainly around the heel while wrapping the rest of the foot with lightweight support.

Both the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 and the Saucony Omni ISO are meant to deliver a soft ride to overpronators, but they do so in different ways.

The ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 has one main layer of foam in the forefoot that thins out and continues to run under the midfoot and the heel, and then there is a second layer of more responsive foam that runs from midfoot to heel.

The ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 also comes with GEL cushioning in the heel to soften your landings at heel-strike.

The Saucony Omni ISO is similar in that it also comes with one main layer of foam in its midsole, but then it also has a toplayer of softer foam that is meant to deliver heel-to-toe cushioning and return energy to you.

According to Saucony, the Saucony Omni ISO is meant to deliver plush cushioning, so your ride should not only feel very supportive but also soft and comfortable.

According to lab tests, the Saucony Omni ISO does deliver an overall soft ride, but while the Saucony Omni ISO has a cushy to very cushy forefoot, it has a more moderate amount of heel cushioning for both men and women.

The ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 displays a somewhat similar cushioning profile by having a cushy forefoot and a more moderately-cushioned to firm heel.

Men get less heel cushioning from the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 than women do, and also less forefoot cushioning than from the Saucony Omni ISO.

Therefore, the Saucony Omni ISO might feel overall cushier to men than the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25.

The difference in heel and forefoot cushioning in the two running shoes is not that big for women, so women could go either way to get an overall soft ride.

Women do get an extra 3 mm of height under their heels in the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 to take stress off their Achilles, so that might be a feature that would make the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 more attractive than the Saucony Omni ISO.

The ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 has a higher heel-to-toe drop than the Saucony Omni ISO. This is mainly because the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 has a somewhat thicker heel but thinner forefoot than the Saucony Omni ISO.

Lab tests give the Saucony Omni ISO higher marks than the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 for returning energy, which should make the Saucony Omni ISO feel bouncier than the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25.

The Saucony Omni ISO and the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 are meant to deliver support to overpronators and do so by having a support system on the medial side of their midsoles.

However, the support system of the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 does not go all the way up to the foot, because there is a thin layer of softer foam that prevents it from doing so.

The medial post of the Saucony Omni ISO does go all the way up to the foot and covers a large area under the heel and the midfoot to deliver a good amount of pronation control.

The Saucony Omni ISO does not come with a midfoot shank like the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 to provide support right under the midfoot, but it delivers more ground contact than the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 so also increases its potential of delivering smoother heel-to-toe transitions compared to the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25.

When you combine the heel counter, midsole support, and midfoot support in the upper, the Saucony Omni ISO might be the one who is ahead in the amount of stability and support delivered.

In addition, Saucony places the Saucony Omni ISO very high on the stability scale, close to motion control, so the Saucony Omni ISO is expected to be a very supportive running shoe.

The rubber outsoles of the two running shoes differ in layout and construction, but both come with a crash section under the heel to isolate shock at heel-strike.

The crash section is more at the back of the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25, while it covers an area from the back of the heel around the lateral side towards the midfoot of the Saucony Omni ISO.

The Saucony Omni ISO also has a longer piece of rubber on the medial side, and because it does not have a midfoot shank, it continues right into the forefoot.

While the Saucony Omni ISO has more flex grooves than the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 in the forefoot, they are interrupted by rubber in the middle, which makes them less effective for flexibility.

However, because the Saucony Omni ISO delivers so much forefoot cushioning, it tends to be on the stiff side anyway for both men and women.

The ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 has a somewhat thinner forefoot than the Saucony Omni ISO, and while it has also been found to be stiff for both men and women, it might feel a bit more flexible than the Saucony Omni ISO.

The ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 also comes with a vertical flex groove that is meant to help with gait efficiency and that is missing on the Saucony Omni ISO.

The women's version of the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 weighs approximately 9.8 oz (278 grams), while the Saucony Omni ISO for women weighs approximately 9.5 oz (269 grams).

The men's version of the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 weighs about 11.9 oz (337 grams), and the Saucony Omni ISO for men weighs about 10.7 oz (303 grams).

If you are a moderate overpronator who is looking for a good amount of stability and support in a running shoe that feels comfortable on your feet, you could look into the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25.

However, if your amount of overpronation falls between moderate to severe, you may want to look into the Saucony Omni ISO first.

Both running shoes can deliver an overall soft ride, but the heel of the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25 could feel firm to some male runners.

The Saucony Omni ISO is also more likely to deliver a somewhat smoother ride and a more secure fit than the ASICS GEL-Kayano 25.

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 Amazon.com where you can read more about the running shoes.


This review falls under: ASICS | Saucony

Disclaimer: This running shoe review on www.motioncontrolrunningshoe.org 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.