Is the ASICS Gel-Nimbus 28 Good for Plantar Fasciitis?
Maximum cushioning is the Nimbus 28’s whole pitch. A podiatrist checks it against what has actually been measured about cushioning and heel pain.
Written and medically reviewed by Dr. Tom Biernacki, DPM, FACFAS · Last reviewed 9 October 2026
We earn a commission if you buy through links on this page, including Amazon links paid by brand partners through Levanta, at no cost to you. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. How we make money
On this page
Spec analysis — not yet tested · Published September 2026
Spec analysis — not yet tested. This shoe has not been through the Podiatrist Tested bench. Every figure below is the manufacturer’s own published number, attributed by name; the reasoning is clinical judgement about the published design, not our measurement. No score, no seal. How we test →
The ASICS Gel-Nimbus is sold on one idea: more cushioning than you need. For heel pain that sounds like exactly the right idea, and it is the reason the Nimbus turns up in so many “best shoes for plantar fasciitis” lists. This page takes the cushioning premise seriously enough to check it — and the checking produces one finding that supports it and one that does not.
It is worth saying what prompted us to write this at all. When we looked at what currently answers this question in search results, we found a thin affiliate blog, two more at domain authority ten and twelve, an Amazon customer question thread, a social media stub, and a page of spam hosted on a hijacked university subdomain. Not one clinician. That is the standard this page is trying to clear.
The evidence for arch support and heel cushioning was downgraded in 2023
The current clinical practice guideline for this condition is Heel Pain — Plantar Fasciitis: Revision 2023, published in the Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy by the Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy and the American Academy of Sports Physical Therapy. We read the guideline itself rather than a summary of it, and this is what changed.
The 2014 version said, at grade A (strong evidence): “Clinicians should use foot orthoses, either prefabricated or custom fabricated/fitted, to support the medial longitudinal arch and cushion the heel…”
The 2023 revision replaced that with two weaker statements:
- Grade B — “Clinicians should not use orthoses, either prefabricated or custom fabricated/fitted, as an isolated treatment for short-term pain relief in individuals with plantar fasciitis.”
- Grade C — “Clinicians may use orthoses… when combined with other treatments…”
Footwear itself appears in that guideline exactly twice, and both times at its weakest grades: under the grade C orthoses heading, as “an over-the-counter heel cushion, footwear modification that provide heel cushioning, especially in individuals with decrease shock absorption capacity”; and under patient education at grade E — theoretical or foundational evidence — as “footwear options to mitigate commonly occurring weight loading stresses.”
There is no grade A or grade B footwear recommendation in the guideline. What does carry grade A: plantar-fascia-specific and calf stretching, manual therapy, taping as an adjunct, and night splints for people who consistently have first-step morning pain.
So the honest framing for every page like this one, ours included: a shoe is a comfort and symptom-management variable. It is not the treatment. Anyone telling you a particular shoe cures plantar fasciitis is claiming more than the evidence supports.
Two facts that should change how you read every shoe review
First: it is not an inflammation. Despite the name, the histology shows myxoid degeneration, collagen disarray, micro-tears and granulation tissue, with a notable absence of the classic inflammatory picture. Clinicians increasingly call it plantar fasciopathy for that reason. This matters commercially, because it means any product sold to you on the promise of “reducing inflammation” in your heel is aimed at a mechanism that is largely not there.
Second: roughly three quarters of cases resolve on their own within twelve months. That single fact quietly destroys most of the shoe testimonials you will read. If someone buys a shoe, and their heel pain improves over the following months, the most likely explanation is the natural history of the condition rather than the shoe. Uncontrolled before-and-after stories — including glowing ones about the shoe on this page — carry almost no information. It is also why we are not going to show you any.
Does cushioning actually help a sore heel?
This is the Nimbus’s entire proposition, so it deserves a straight answer. The evidence points in two directions at once, and both directions are worth knowing.
The finding that supports it
The clinical practice guideline does mention heel cushioning — once, under its grade C orthoses heading, recommending “an over-the-counter heel cushion, footwear modification that provide heel cushioning, especially in individuals with decrease shock absorption capacity.” Note the qualifier: it is aimed at people whose feet do not absorb shock well, identified by a foot posture score indicating excessive supination — a high-arched, rigid foot type. If that is you, this is the one place in the guideline where cushioning is specifically endorsed, weak grade and all.
Alongside that, the single direct footwear study in patients with plantar heel pain found a shoe change reduced peak heel pressure by about 15 per cent. A shoe can measurably alter what the sore part of your heel experiences.
The finding that does not
In a randomised controlled trial, 52 people with persistent plantar heel pain did four weeks of treadmill walking either barefoot or in comfortable sports shoes. Both improved. The barefoot group improved more — morning pain fell 5.1 cm on a visual analogue scale against 2.9 cm for the shod group, with roughly double the gain in physical function.
That is an awkward result for maximum cushioning and we are not going to leave it out. It does not mean you should stop wearing shoes; it was supervised treadmill walking, and most participants had done essentially no barefoot walking beforehand, so some of the effect may be a novel loading stimulus rather than the absence of a shoe. But it is a genuine randomised finding that cuts against the assumption that softer is automatically better.
There is a third piece worth holding. In that same footwear study, five different insoles — varying in material, density and arch contour — were tested inside the same shoe, and there were no significant differences between any of them. If insole choice inside a shoe produced no measurable difference, it should make everyone more modest about how finely tuned any of these choices really are.
Our honest reading: cushioning is a reasonable comfort lever, it has the guideline’s weakest endorsement for a specific foot type, and it is not established as treatment. Comfort is a legitimate thing to buy. Just buy it knowing that is what you are buying.
What has actually been measured about shoes
Very little, and it is worth knowing exactly how little.
- One direct footwear-design study in patients. Franettovich Smith and colleagues (Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, 2025) tested 29 women with plantar heel pain in a shoe with a 14 mm heel-to-toe pitch against one with a 4 mm pitch. The higher-pitch shoe reduced peak heel pressure by about 15 per cent. Five different insoles inside the test shoe produced no significant differences between them. Read the limitation carefully: this measured immediate pressure, not pain over time. It shows a shoe can change what your heel feels. It does not show that changing that changes the condition.
- One randomised trial that went the other way. Reinstein and colleagues (Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 2024) randomised 52 people with persistent plantar heel pain to four weeks of treadmill walking either barefoot or in comfortable sports shoes. Both groups improved. The barefoot group improved more — morning pain fell 5.1 cm on a visual analogue scale versus 2.9 cm shod, with a larger gain in physical function. This is an inconvenient result for the entire supportive-shoe category and we are not going to pretend it does not exist. It was treadmill walking under supervision, not a recommendation to throw your shoes away.
- Combination, not shoe alone. A systematic review of mechanical treatments found that rocker-soled shoes produced significant pain reduction when combined with customised insoles. The benefit attaches to the combination. No trial has shown a retail shoe on its own treating this condition.
What ASICS actually publishes
One structural note that shapes this whole section: ASICS does not publish stack heights on its US product pages, and neither does any other mainstream running brand. For the shoe whose entire selling point is how much material is underfoot, the amount of material underfoot is not a published figure. That is worth sitting with. ASICS also sells its wide fittings as separate product codes rather than as a width option inside one listing, so the figures below are tied to the specific code.
| Specification | Figure |
|---|---|
| Heel drop | 8 mm — ASICS’ own label “Heel Drop” |
| Weight (Extra Wide, men’s, code 1011C145) | 281 g / 9.9 oz — ASICS states no sample size |
| Heel stack | Not published by ASICS |
| Forefoot stack | Not published by ASICS |
| Wide fittings | Sold as separate product codes. ASICS labels them in words — “Extra Wide” — and does not publish the 2E / 4E letter designations on these pages; those come from retailers |
| Rocker | No rocker claim from ASICS for this model |
So who is this shoe actually for
A reasonable pick if…
- You have a high-arched, rigid, poor-shock-absorbing foot. This is the one foot type the guideline specifically names in connection with heel cushioning, and it is the strongest case for a maximally cushioned shoe.
- You need a genuine extra-wide. ASICS sells the Nimbus 28 in an extra-wide product code of its own, which is a real advantage over brands that only offer standard fittings.
- You are on hard floors for long hours and want the day to hurt less. That is a comfort goal and a legitimate one.
- Comfort is your criterion. Buying a shoe because it feels better is defensible. Buying it because it will fix the condition is not.
Look elsewhere if…
- You need pronation control. The Nimbus is the neutral shoe in the range. If your foot rolls inward significantly, the Gel-Kayano is the stability model — see our page on the Gel-Kayano 32 and plantar fasciitis.
- You want the highest available drop. ASICS lists 8 mm, mid-range, but a lab measured 5.2 mm on the 28. The one direct patient study favoured a 14 mm pitch on peak heel pressure. Our Gel-Nimbus 27 vs 28 comparison has the lab figures.
- You are buying maximum softness expecting maximum relief. The barefoot trial is a real result and it points the other way. More cushioning is not a linear dial toward less pain.
- You want a published stack height to compare against another shoe. ASICS does not give you one.
Our full ASICS Gel-Nimbus 28 spec analysis covers the shoe outside this condition. If you are comparing across the whole category rather than checking one model, start at best shoes for plantar fasciitis.
What actually carries the strongest evidence
If you only act on one section of this page, make it this one. These are the grade A recommendations from the 2023 guideline — the interventions with a preponderance of high-quality evidence behind them:
- Plantar-fascia-specific stretching, plus calf stretching. In DiGiovanni’s two-year follow-up, 94 per cent of patients reported pain reduced or eliminated and none went on to surgery. Note honestly that everyone in that trial also received a prefabricated insole and a short course of anti-inflammatory medication, so it is not a clean test of stretching alone.
- Manual therapy directed at the joints and soft tissue of the lower limb, with emphasis on improving ankle dorsiflexion.
- Taping, rigid or elastic, in conjunction with other treatment, for short-term relief.
- Night splints for one to three months, specifically for people who consistently have pain with the first steps in the morning. Worth flagging a disagreement here: the guideline grades this A, but American Family Physician called the role of night splints “inconclusive” and an umbrella review found no difference against orthoses. We are giving you the guideline grade and the dissent.
There is also a mechanical reason the calf keeps appearing. In a study of rocker shoes, changes in Achilles tendon force accounted for about 65 per cent of total plantar fascia strain. The calf drives the load on your heel far more than most footwear marketing acknowledges — which is part of why stretching outranks shoes in the evidence.
When it is not plantar fasciitis
Do not buy a shoe for these — get assessed. Heel pain that is not worst on the first steps of the day; pain that does not ease as you warm up; night pain or pain at rest; a sudden pop or an inability to put weight through the foot (fascial rupture, and a recognised complication of steroid injection); focal bony tenderness, especially after a recent jump in impact loading (calcaneal stress fracture); burning, tingling, numbness or radiating pain (nerve entrapment, including Baxter’s nerve and tarsal tunnel — the guideline’s own diagnostic criteria require negative tarsal tunnel tests before calling it plantar fasciitis); heel pain in both feet alongside morning stiffness elsewhere or inflammatory back and joint symptoms (spondyloarthritis); or no improvement at three months despite proper treatment, which is the point at which imaging is generally considered. The guideline also asks clinicians to look for fat-pad atrophy and proximal plantar fibroma when a case is atypical or is not resolving.
Common questions
Is more cushioning better for plantar fasciitis?
Not straightforwardly. The guideline endorses heel cushioning only at grade C and only for people with poor shock absorption, and a randomised trial found barefoot walking beat shod walking on morning pain. Cushioning is a comfort variable with a weak and conditional evidence base, not a dose-response dial.
Nimbus or Kayano for heel pain?
They answer different questions. The Nimbus is neutral maximum cushioning; the Kayano is the stability shoe, aimed at a foot that rolls inward. Both publish an 8 mm drop; a lab measured 5.2 mm on the Nimbus 28 and 9.3 mm on the Kayano 32. Which is right depends on your foot, not on your diagnosis, and is worth having someone look at.
What is the Nimbus 28’s stack height?
ASICS does not publish one. Any figure you see is a retailer’s or a reviewer’s measurement, not a manufacturer specification.
Does the Gel actually do anything for heel pain?
ASICS makes cushioning claims for its technology; we have no measurement of our own, and there is no trial showing this or any brand’s cushioning material changes plantar fasciitis outcomes. Treat it as a comfort feature.
Should I get the extra wide?
If your foot needs it, yes — and it is a genuine advantage that ASICS makes one. A shoe that pinches will not be comfortable however much foam is underneath it. Note that ASICS names it in words rather than publishing a width code.
Sources
- Koc TA Jr, et al. Heel Pain — Plantar Fasciitis: Revision 2023. Clinical Practice Guidelines linked to the ICF, Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy and American Academy of Sports Physical Therapy, APTA. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2023;53(12):CPG1–CPG39. — the 2014 grade A orthoses recommendation and its 2023 replacement by the grade B “should not use… as an isolated treatment” and grade C “may use… combined” statements; the grade C heel-cushioning footwear-modification bullet; the grade E patient-education footwear line; grade A status for stretching, manual therapy, taping and night splints. Read at source.
- Plantar Fasciitis. StatPearls (NBK431073). — degenerative rather than inflammatory histology; first-step morning pain; approximately 75% resolve within 12 months; differential diagnosis.
- Plantar Fasciitis (heel pain) review. American Family Physician, 2019. — “fasciopathy” framing; SORT ratings; differential table; three-month imaging threshold; night-splint dissent.
- Franettovich Smith MM, et al. Immediate Effects of Footwear Design on In-Shoe Plantar Pressures, Impact Forces and Comfort in Women With Plantar Heel Pain. J Foot Ankle Res. 2025;18(2):e70055. — 29 women; 14 mm vs 4 mm pitch; ~15% heel peak pressure reduction; no differences between five insoles; immediate effects only.
- Reinstein M, Weisman A, Masharawi Y. Barefoot walking is beneficial for individuals with persistent plantar heel pain: a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2024;67:101786. — n=52; morning pain VAS improvement 5.1 cm barefoot vs 2.9 cm shod.
- Greve C, et al. Biomechanical effects of rocker shoes on plantar aponeurosis strain in patients with plantar fasciitis and healthy controls. PLOS ONE. 2019;14(10):e0222388. — no significant reduction in plantar aponeurosis strain between shoe conditions (p = .089, n = 16); Achilles tendon force accounted for 65 ± 2% of total strain.
- Effectiveness of Mechanical Treatment for Plantar Fasciitis: A Systematic Review. J Sport Rehabil. 2020;29(5). — 43 studies; rocker-soled shoes with customised insoles produced significant pain reduction; prefabricated and custom insoles comparable.
- DiGiovanni BF, et al. Plantar fascia-specific stretching exercise improves outcomes in patients with chronic plantar fasciitis: two-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88-A(8):1775–1781. — 94% pain reduced or eliminated at two years; no surgery; note both arms also received prefabricated insoles.
- Rasenberg N, et al. Efficacy of foot orthoses for the treatment of plantar heel pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52(16):1040–1046. — no difference between prefabricated and custom orthoses on short-term pain.
- American Podiatric Medical Association Seal of Acceptance database, apma.org. — checked directly for every seal claim on this page.
- ASICS product pages for the Gel-Nimbus 28, including the Extra Wide product code 1011C145, asics.com US, September 2026. — heel drop, weight, and the absence of stack heights, width letter codes and any rocker claim.
Page type: spec analysis — not yet tested · This shoe has not been measured on our bench · All figures manufacturer-published and attributed; retailer figures labelled as such · Last verified September 2026 · By Dr. Thomas Biernacki, DPM
Reviews for Plantar Fasciitis
Individual shoe pages state their evidence tier, published measurements and who should skip them.
Dansko XP 2.0
Spec AnalysisOccupational clog with a removable dual-density footbed and slip-resistant outsole — not yet tested.
Orthofeet Coral
Spec AnalysisExtra depth, published quarter-inch removable insole, widths A to 4E depending on colour, 15.7 mm drop — not yet tested.
Skechers GO WALK Arch Fit 2.0
Spec AnalysisRemovable Arch Fit insole, hands-free entry, APMA Seal on some styles — not yet tested.
Our funding and evidence policy
We earn affiliate commissions from qualifying purchases. Our policy is to assess published evidence and fit needs rather than rank products by commission rate. Current reviews are specification analyses; see our method for their limits.