Verdict
Head-to-head · Best Running Shoes for Flat Feet

ASICS GT-2000 14 vs Saucony Tempus 2

Which is the better buy? Side-by-side on rating, price, strengths, and watch-outs — with the published ratings we averaged to get there.

Verdict is reader-supported. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Some links on this page are affiliate links — if you click through and buy, we may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. Our ratings are sourced from independent publications, not sponsors.
The short answer

Saucony Tempus 2 comes out ahead by a narrow margin (4.2 vs 4.5). The gap is mostly about runners with narrow feet wanting energy return — read the strengths below before deciding.

ASICS GT-2000 14
Ranked #8 in Best Running Shoes for Flat Feet
ASICS GT-2000 14
3 sources1 derived$109.95as of Aug 1

The ASICS GT-2000 14 is a stability daily trainer that swapped FF Blast+ for FF Blast Max and got softer and bouncier for it. RunRepeat scored it 87 out of 100, Road Trail Run 9.5 out of 10 and Doctors of Running 3.5 out of 5, a wide spread that reflects genuine disagreement about the fit. Support comes from geometry rather than a medial post, the outsole is durable, and the toebox is tapered enough to rule the shoe out for wide feet.

Strengths
  • Improved FF Blast Max foam provides stronger shock absorption with 132 SA in the heel and 110 SA in the forefoot
  • Outstanding outsole durability with dependable traction for everyday use
  • Full-length medial stability system offers consistent support from heel to forefoot
Watch-outs
  • Tapered toebox may feel restrictive and limits toe splay, especially for those needing extra room
  • Limited breathability due to dense upper material, which can feel warm during long runs
Saucony Tempus 2
Higher ratedRanked #2 in Best Running Shoes for Flat Feet
Saucony Tempus 2
5 sources$169.95as of Aug 1

Still one of the lightest stability shoes on the market, the Saucony Tempus 2 runs on energetic PWRRUN PB foam with strong energy return. Reviewers praised the stability and durability, and RunRepeat called it a 'solid choice' for heel strikers who want a responsive daily trainer. The complaints center on a snug fit, particularly through the forefoot, and poor breathability. Doctors of Running noted the tapered toe box can cause minor abrasion, and some users found the laces too short to lock the foot down. Runners with narrow to standard feet who want stability and energy return more than cushioning and airflow are the fit.

Strengths
  • Lightest superfoam stability shoe available
  • Excellent energy return with PWRRUN PB foam
  • Very stable ride with firm PWRRUN frame support
Watch-outs
  • Poor breathability in upper mesh
  • Slightly heavier than previous version
  • Overly snug forefoot and narrow toe box

Derived means the reviewer published no score, so one was inferred from their written verdict. Everything else is a number the publisher printed. How we rank.

How they stack up

ASICS GT-2000 14

The ASICS GT-2000 14 offers better shock absorption than the Hoka Arahi 8 and provides more consistent support from heel to forefoot than the Saucony Guide 18. However, it's less breathable than the New Balance Fresh Foam X 860 v14 and has a more restrictive toebox than the Hoka Gaviota 6.

Saucony Tempus 2

The Saucony Tempus 2 is lighter and more responsive than the ASICS Gel-Kayano 32 and offers better energy return than the Saucony Hurricane 25, but it's less stable than the Hoka Gaviota 6 and lacks the breathability of the New Balance Fresh Foam X 860 v14. It's also more restrictive than the Saucony Guide 18.

Specs side-by-side

SpecASICS GT-2000 14Saucony Tempus 2
Weight9.6 oz9.3 oz
Stack Height36.5 mm heel / 28.5 mm forefoot38 mm
Drop8 mm8 mm
MidsoleFF Blast Max foamPWRRUN PB
StabilityGuideTracNeutral
Arch SupportMediumMedium
UpperEngineered meshEngineered mesh
OutsoleAHAR rubberXT-900 carbon rubber
Dimensions12.44 x 6.3 x 4.75 inches; 1.44 pounds
← See the full ranking of best running shoes for flat feet