ÿþThank you for all these reviews. SO excellent. I'm a flat asics gt 3000 footed runner with a partial meniscus surgery. So I think a bit more cushioning would help. I Think? My last two pairs of running and training shoes have been Saucony Guide 5s. My all-time favorite shoe (almost 15 years ago) was the Asics 2030. In any case, I'm in search of new trainers. Mostly for 5Ks at the longest and track workouts and maybe some plyos. I just need to train for some ultimate frisbee. I can probably switch to basketball shoes for plyos .

What would be your recommendation for a flat footed runner looking for the best cushionined ride? the Kayano 21, Guide 7s, Ride 7, Lunarglide6 or something else? Also why is the Kayano 20s rated higher than the 21?Could you kindly include Arch type in all your reviews? Thank you again for all these reviews and much asics gt 2000 4 womens appreciated.Thanks for the great review. Been reading a lot of reviews lately and have to say Solereview is the best! I'm an Underpronator and beginning to wonder if shoes that "specialize" in the different footstirkes really make a difference for someone whose workouts consist of mainly inclined treadmill walking (bad asics kayano womens 23 back can't take the pounding of running any more) 3 to 4 times a week for about 45 minutes each .

I agree, mizuno uppers don't last long as they are so minimalist. If this is a problem and you require width, I would also suggest Brook's transcend or Ravenna, new balance  the model you have mentioned (860) is fine, I would avoid the fresh foam, or asics  try the ds trainer version.So Adrenaline 15 first. Tried a UK size 10 2E, my usual size is 9.5, but general consensus that you need half a size up asics kayano 24 mens in this years model. A very snug fit and the arch support was instantly prominent, but not as bad as the GT-2000 and it actually felt in the right place on this shoe unlike the GT-2000 to me.

I did  feel' the arch when walking around the store which did worry me, but again, not as prominent as it was in the Asics. Ran for 10 mins and didn't feel the arch when running (probably as I have forefoot strike), but instantly felt it subtly there again when I got off the treadmill. I also felt the shoe wasn't quite wide enough, even at 2E. I ran a few more times in both shoes and I just felt the Adrenaline as going to be too snug/tight down the sides of the little toe as my feet warmed up.Something in me wanted to like the Brooks more in the same way I really wanted to like the Asics, don't know why.

Anyway I've noticed that, after a certain distance, my shins start to hurt and will hurt for the next couple of days. This limits the distance I can run each week. I think the main brunt of my (rather heavy) footstrike asics nimbus 19 mens is mid-sole to heel- which puts a lot of stress on my shins and knees. For the past six months, I've been using Brooks Ghost 7's, which were recommended for me after having a gait analysis done in a running shop. I'm finding that these really don't provide the cushioning I require. So, I'm looking into the more cushioning-heavy styles of shoe. Having read both reviews, I've narrowed it down to the Adidas Ultra Boost (though I have heard these aren't so good for people with wider feet), the Asics Gel Kayano 21 and the Haka One One Clifton.