Brooks Ghost Max vs ASICS Gel Nimbus 25: Which Max-Cushion Trainer Deserves Your Easy Miles?

Introduction

Max-cushion daily trainers have become the default choice for easy miles, and two of the most talked-about options right now are the Brooks Ghost Max and the ASICS Gel Nimbus 25. Both are big, stable, comfort-first shoes built primarily for easy runs and daily training, and both represent a new direction for their respective brands: the Ghost Max is Brooks’s first properly max-cushion shoe, while the Nimbus 25 is a major step up in stack height from the Nimbus 24.

They share a surprising amount of DNA. But there are meaningful differences in ride feel, responsiveness, outsole coverage and price, and those differences will decide which one belongs in your rotation.

Two Shoes, One Job

The ASICS Gel Nimbus 25 uses a FF Blast Plus midsole with a small amount of PureGel under the heel, a newer formulation of gel designed to feel softer and more comfortable. The whole shoe was redesigned to be softer than previous Nimbus versions, and it shows: it sinks into the landing and gives you a plush, cruising ride that many runners clearly love.

The Brooks Ghost Max instead leans on a large stack of DNA Loft v2 foam paired with the GlideRoll rocker, which creates a smooth heel-to-toe transition. Add a broad base, foam sidewalls and a substantial heel counter, and the shoe stays remarkably stable despite all that foam underfoot.

Specs and Weight

The numbers tell you how closely matched these shoes are:

• Brooks Ghost Max: 39mm heel / 33mm forefoot, 6mm drop, 304g (10.7oz) in UK size 9
• ASICS Gel Nimbus 25: 41.5mm heel / 33.5mm forefoot, 8mm drop, 315g (11.1oz) in the same size

The Nimbus 25 carries the highest heel stack of the two, and it is also the pricier shoe at $160 versus $150 for the Ghost Max. In the UK the gap is bigger, with the Nimbus sitting noticeably higher on RRP. Both feel lighter on the foot than their size suggests, thanks in part to well-tuned rocker geometries.

Fit and Sizing

Both shoes run true to size in regular running shoe sizing, and neither caused fit problems over 50km-plus of testing. The differences are subtle but worth knowing.

The Ghost Max is the slightly narrower of the two, particularly through the midfoot, with a more traditional padded tongue and a very comfortable step-in feel from the engineered mesh upper. The Nimbus 25 wraps the foot a touch more closely but opens up a little more at the midfoot, with a thinner, stretchier tongue and a soft, stretchy knit upper with plenty of padding around the heel.

If you want the more accommodating, roomier feel, the Nimbus 25 has the edge. If you prefer a more structured, padded fit, the Ghost Max is the one to try. In both cases, stick with your usual size.

Ride Feel: The Real Difference

This is where the two shoes genuinely part ways. In side-by-side running, they feel remarkably similar on the foot: near-identical step-in comfort, similar heel hold, similar foam volume and similar weight. What separates them is how the foam behaves.

The Nimbus 25 sinks more underfoot and takes longer to return, which makes it the softer, plusher ride. For long, slow, easy and recovery miles, that sink-in comfort is exactly what many runners want from a max-cushion shoe, and it is arguably what most people expect the category to deliver.

The Ghost Max is firmer and more immediate. It returns quicker, feels a bit more rigid, and relies heavily on its rocker and that slightly snappier foam to move you along. The payoff is pace versatility: it handles efforts up to around marathon pace without feeling out of its depth, something the softer Nimbus struggles with when you push the tempo.

Neither shoe is a true speed day option, and both are best treated as easy-run and long-run specialists. But if your easy days occasionally drift a little quicker, the Ghost Max gives you more room to do that.

Outsole, Grip and Stability

The Ghost Max has the clearer advantage here. Almost the entire outsole is covered in rubber, with a groove down the middle to help keep the foot neutral, and it gripped confidently on wet pavements and leaf-covered surfaces. It should also hold up well to heavy regular mileage.

The Nimbus 25 covers the key impact areas at the front and rear with exposed foam in the middle. Durability has been fine so far, but early runs showed slightly less assured grip until the rubber roughed up. On wet winter pavements, the Brooks is the safer bet.

On stability, both brands have done serious work: broad bases, foam sidewalls and solid heel counters keep either shoe reliable on cambered pavements and uneven ground. The Ghost Max edges it slightly, but neither shoe wobbles despite the towering stacks.

Which One Should You Buy?

If you want the plushest, most comfortable possible ride for slow long runs and recovery miles, the Gel Nimbus 25 is the better fit. Its foam feels more refined, the upper is more luxurious, and everything is tuned around sinking into comfort. It is also the more accommodating shape for wider-feeling fits.

If you want a cushioned shoe that still gives a little back when you pick up the pace, the Ghost Max is the smarter pick. The rocker is well designed, the ride is more responsive, the outsole is better built for wet-weather mileage, and it costs less. Heavier runners may also appreciate the slightly firmer, more stable platform.

Price matters too. At their US RRPs the gap is small, but when discounts bring them close together, the Nimbus 25 is the slightly more enjoyable shoe for pure comfort. When the Ghost Max is meaningfully cheaper, it becomes very hard to argue against it.

Conclusion

These are two capable max-cushion trainers that do a similarly good job on easy and long runs, with almost nothing to separate them on fit, comfort, weight or stability. The Nimbus 25 is the softer, plusher, more luxurious ride; the Ghost Max is firmer, more responsive, better on wet roads and friendlier to your wallet. Choose based on which ride character and price point suits your rotation, and you will not be disappointed with either.