|
|
|
1.
|
tulsa what? rated this product
1 star
Tue, January 26,2010:
asics laid an egg with this shoe. I have no idea what tulsa is talking about. They should not even mess with this legendary line.
|
|
|
|
2.
|
tulsa rated this product
5 stars
Tue, January 26,2010:
I never write reviews but I thought i should considering how much i like these shoe. I went ahead and bought them despite all the bad press from this site. GLAD I DID. I think i know where all the neg opinions are coming from though. minus is, cushioning is now a 8/10 versus 10/10 from gt 2140. Plus is, they're now lighter. so......jog on.
|
|
|
|
3.
|
Jack rated this product
1 star
Sun, January 24,2010:
The 2150 is quite a different shoe than 2140. There is much less cushioning. After my first run my back hurt and my knees hurt. I am very disappointed and will return the shoes.
|
|
|
|
4.
|
Brad rated this product
2 stars
Sat, January 23,2010:
Like a lot of others who have written reviews I am also a little disappointed with this new model. I was excited about the new 2150 after my 2140 had been so great. I am however now also suffering from uncharacteristic arch rubbing. I'm having to consider a return and change of shoes.
|
|
|
|
5.
|
MAZ rated this product
5 stars
Thu, January 21,2010:
I tried all types of stability shoes on the market from the Brooks Adrenaline 9, New Balance 1225, Nike Equalon +3 and I must say my favorite was the Asics 2140. The Asics 2140 was the only shoe that never caused me to get shin splits regardless of how fast or what surface I ran on. I went through two pairs already (typically run 25-30 miles a week) and now it was time to buy my third. Was excited about Asics updating their 2140 to the new 2150, despite of all the bad reviews it got on this site. Got the 2150 last month and I must say WOW what a shoe. Asics did a great job with the 2150; from the stability, cushioning to the all out comfort of the shoe. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, but at the same time don’t let other people’s reviews influence you in selecting the right shoe for your feet. Go and try the shoe and judge for yourselves.
|
|
|
|
6.
|
M. Ramsey rated this product
5 stars
Tue, January 19,2010:
I'm an avid runner and average about 25 miles a week. I'm 5' 9" and weigh nearly 200lbs. I have been running on Asic's premium shoe, the Gel-Kayano series, for about 5 years now, and decided to "downgrade" to the GT series after my last pair of Kayanos didn't last very long. So far these shoes are great! Every bit the shoe the Kayano is without the premium price. I wouldn't hesitate to buy these again or to recommend them to anyone who has a larger frame that needs more cushioning.
|
|
|
|
7.
|
Glenn rated this product
2 stars
Mon, January 18,2010:
If you're looking to replace your 2140s, look elsewhere. The 2150 is much harder with a much larger toe box. After three 5 mile runs my knees started to hurt. I returned them. I'm 190 lbs. and trained for and ran a marathon in October 2009 in the 2140s with no issues. 2140s were the best shoes I've ever owned.
|
|
|
|
8.
|
Dick W. rated this product
5 stars
Mon, January 11,2010:
I love these shoes. They fit the same way as the 2140's, but I think the cushioning is a little better. Not sure why so many are giving this a 1 or 2 star...definitely create your own opinion and not rely on others. Bootom line...great shoe!
|
|
|
|
9.
|
Go Big Blue! rated this product
1 star
Thu, January 07,2010:
Awful so far! Been running in this shoe series since 2001 when they were GT 2060. Always loved them and been through 4 pairs of 2140's. Looking forward to trying the 2150's and have been completely let down. They don't feel any better after the 3rd run than they did right out of the box. Caused lots of pain in the bottom of my feet and even some in my ankle/lower calf. I'm only 5'10' and 155lbs. Don't know what Asics changed but I'm very disappointed. I wouldn't recommend these for anyone after what I've experienced.
|
|
|
|
10.
|
joozu rated this product
2 stars
Tue, January 05,2010:
Only my second pair of Asics. The first one was great but my new 2150 is way to hard on the heel-to-toe transition. It feels like my toes barely touch the ground. What's the deal with such a large sole?
|
|
|
|
11.
|
Jason rated this product
2 stars
Tue, January 05,2010:
I really liked the 2140s, but the 2150 is a disappointment to me. Right out of the box the shoes caused blisters in the arch regions of both feet. Seems the toe box is more narrow. I'm still using the shoes by wearing mole skins. I run about 30 miles a week and these shoes seem as if 2 months will be their max life; heels are wearing fast. :(
|
|
|
|
12.
|
Mike C rated this product
1 star
Tue, January 05,2010:
What happened Asics?? I by no means am a new runner, nor a casual runner. I ran various 1/2 Marathons last year and 1 Full, finishing in the top 4% in my best 1/2. I consider myself fairly hardcore, therefore take this review to heart. In the last two years I have had 2 pair of 2130's and 3 pair of 2140's. Since my last pair of 2140's were shot, I figured the 2150's would be the simple replacement. Unfortunately that was not the case. The 2150's caused a lot of issues from the knees down. Ankle, arch, calf, and metatarsal pains came from nowhere. The shoe seemed to have a possibly shorter metatarsal area and a higher durometer rubber sole. I typically could go from one pair to another without any issues, not is the case here. I usually don't write reviews, but I felt obligated to my fellow runners to do so. I Love(d) my Asics, please go back with your original design even if they are a couple of ounces heavier. A light shoe is no good if it is uncomfortable. BTW: 10 2E is m
|
|
|
|
13.
|
Albert rated this product
5 stars
Sun, January 03,2010:
I've run in this line of ASICS for years, and this update is very consistent with previous updates, slightly roomier toe-box, snug heel, ride is consistently smooth, no break-in. I did move to a thinner sock for more toe room and feel (switched to WrightSock double layer lite coolmesh from Thorlo coolmax) and have concentrated on running more off my forefoot, and these shoes accommodate that well. I'm surprised that others found negatives in this shoe.
|
|
|
|
14.
|
robh rated this product
5 stars
Sat, January 02,2010:
Wow1!-i am really shocked at the reviews of this shoe-it makes me think Asics somehow sent a bad first shipment and everyone below have them---I as a 10 year vet with this shoe find the 2150 as good or better than any version since the 2070.This shoe is not hard and the heel is snug so i can relate to the blisters but it will form to the heel.Not sure if the below runners are premature or if they really ran more than 50 miles in them-*****
|
|
|
|
15.
|
Big Foot rated this product
1 star
Tue, December 29,2009:
Dreadful update. Like running barefoot on cement !!! Stop messing with this icon Asics.
|
|
|
|
16.
|
Red Blue Blur rated this product
2 stars
Mon, December 28,2009:
A lot more firmer than the 2140.
|
|
|
|
17.
|
KM rated this product
1 star
Sat, December 26,2009:
They did it again. Every 6 or 7 years, they take a great shoe and ruin it. This shoe is terrible. I have been running in the 20xx and 21xx series for decades and they have been great. They wrecked the 2030 way back when and I went to Brooks, evidently so did everyone else. So, they learned and changed it back. Now they must have some new genius there who wasn't part of that blunder who has done it again. Cushioning is way too hard in the arches and, like others here, the shoe gives blisters. I NEVER get blisters, but I do with this shoe. It is the worst shoe I have had since the very first pair of no-name running shoes I bought at a store for $10 in the 80's.
|
|
|
|
18.
|
jim rated this product
4 stars
Thu, December 24,2009:
2140-2150 no big difference
|
|
|
|
19.
|
Great shoe.... but Blisters!!! rated this product
1 star
Sun, December 20,2009:
I think the shoe is awesome in every way (construction, ride, feel, looks, etc.) and I want to like it except it gives me blisters in the arch (I haven't had this problem in earlier models). Blisters stop you from running. A running shoe that keeps you from running? That's a bad thing. Go with the 2140 or go somewhere else (not asics) is my advice.
|
|
|
|
20.
|
Stephen rated this product
1 star
Wed, December 16,2009:
Really disappointed with this shoe. I have been running in this line forever, and these are the first to give me blisters on the arch of my feet.
|
|
|
|
21.
|
Stolf rated this product
5 stars
Thu, November 26,2009:
Great shoe as always better support and a bit lighter
|
|
|
|
22.
|
Anonymous rated this product
1 star
Wed, November 25,2009:
Shoe is for light runners who enjoy running.
|
|
|
|
23.
|
Maciek rated this product
1 star
Wed, November 25,2009:
Based on the success of the preceding models the new GT2150 must be great too, right? Wrong! This shoe is a great disappointment. After doing the initial 5k few days back my feet covered in bloody blisters, especially in the arch area. Putting on few layers of adhesive wound tape yesterday didn't help at all and after 15 years of regular running I was hereby eliminated from the runners community for at least couple of weeks. Since there is nothing wrong with my feet and nothing similar has ever happened to me before, there is only one reason coming to my mind - Asics seems to be one of those companies that took their success for granted and just stopped taking care of details. Great news for competitors, bad for devoted Asics users, including myself until recently.
|
|
|
|
24.
|
Zane rated this product
2 stars
Tue, November 24,2009:
The 2140 was a disappointment for me...the 2150 was a bigger disappointment. They feel ok out of the box and walking around, but any run over 4 miles leaves me with blisters/pain on the inside of my heel. Sort of corresponds with the slash where the cushioning density changes. With the 2140s they seemed to break in around the 100 mile point. Hoping the same for these 2150s but I won't be buying anything else new in this line-up. With the older models in this line-up they were perfect for me from the very first run. My weight is 190lbs...maybe these are ok for lighter runners.
|
|
|
|
25.
|
moov foreward rated this product
4 stars
Mon, November 23,2009:
Had to try a 10EE to get the correct fit as the 10.5 I wear in any other shoe was too narrow in the heel and caused blistering on the inside edges of my heel. When I tried on an old pair of 2100 and 2110 I could tell that the heel design of the 2140 and 2150 are more narrow in the back end. The cush and ride are top notch with great toe off stability and just enough medial support that doesn't get in the way.
|
|
|
|
26.
|
Angel rated this product
5 stars
Mon, November 23,2009:
This is a great shoe. I've worn the Asics 2140 and they felt great, then I decided to change to Saucony's and it was a bad decision. I got injured, and I just ended up with a really bad Cross Country season. The 2150's are great, Asics are awesome.
|
|
|
|
27.
|
Tim rated this product
3 stars
Sat, November 21,2009:
The 2150 is a disappointing update. The toe box has been expanded a full 1/4" on the size 10. The heal pading has also been thinned. Trying a half size smaller proved too short. Bottom line, the shoe just feels bigger and less supportive than past 2000/2100 series. The 2150 has more cushioning, but in conjunction with the larger fit, it feel mushy. I purchased 2 pair; I will return the unused pair.
|
|
|
|
28.
|
James rated this product
4 stars
Thu, November 19,2009:
just got. Bigger toe box and slightly more cushioned than 40,better ankle grip. Just wish asics had a shorter break in time.
|
|
|
|
29.
|
Justin rated this product
5 stars
Mon, November 09,2009:
these shoes are great!!
ive run in asics 1130s and 2130s
once i got nike structure 12 i got injured half of my cross country season!
so i got these an now im back into my old shape and i love the cushion and the structure of the shoe!
|
|
|
|
30.
|
Anonymous rated this product
4 stars
Sat, November 07,2009:
The arch feels less in the way,better forefoot stability and a roomy fit. the heel feels slightly lower as well.
|
|
|
|
31.
|
kevin rated this product
4 stars
Fri, November 06,2009:
so far so good- nice mix between stability and flex, reminds me of the fortitude 2 a lot.
|
|
|
|
32.
|
stevie rated this product
1 star
Fri, October 30,2009:
disappointing update. bad heel to toe transition. poor flexibility. come on asics stop messing with this series.
|
|
|
|
33.
|
??? rated this product
5 stars
Fri, October 23,2009:
try the shoe before you rate it..the shoe feels fine..maybe not as flexible as the 2130-40 but not that noticeable. cushioning is fine
|
|
|
|
34.
|
Aaron rated this product
5 stars
Wed, October 21,2009:
I ran in the 2130 and the 2140. Put lots of miles on both. Never had the problem Henry had. I hope the 2150 continues to be quality stuff.
|
|
|
|
35.
|
Harry rated this product
1 star
Mon, October 19,2009:
I hope the GT-2150 goes back to the Material They had In the GT-2120. I wore Asics since the GT-2070, But after paying $95 for the GT-2130 and having the inside heel wear out within 60 miles I had the shoe replaced with another GT-2130 B width and in about 70 miles the same thing happen the inside heel wore a big Hole. I still have GT-2120 with over 400 miles and no hole in the inside of the shoes
|
