Men's GT-1000 15 GTX vs Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C: which is safer?

Converse Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C is our pick, better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.

Asics Men's GT-1000 15 GTX

ASICS

Men's GT-1000 15 GTX

PFAS grade

Bad 20/100

Overall grade

Bad 4/100

Verdict

Skip

Hazard flags

⚑ 4

Material

Mesh/synthetic upper with Gore-Tex waterproof membrane

Confidence

45%

PossibleAzo dyes and formaldehyde resins in synthetic textiles

PossibleSynthetic lining microfiber shedding and inhalation

PossibleGore-Tex membrane delamination releasing particles

Our pick

Converse Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C

Converse

Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C

PFAS grade

Good 65/100

Overall grade

Good 57/100

Verdict

Skip

Hazard flags

⚑ 2

Material

Canvas upper, rubber sole

Confidence

72%

PossibleAzo dyes in canvas

PossibleFormaldehyde resin finishing on canvas

Where these two actually differ

  • We flag Azo dyes and formaldehyde resins in synthetic textiles, Synthetic lining microfiber shedding and inhalation, Gore-Tex membrane delamination releasing particles and Adhesive volatiles (VOC off-gassing) from sole-to-upper bonding on the ASICS and not on the Converse.
  • We flag Azo dyes in canvas and Formaldehyde resin finishing on canvas on the Converse and not on the ASICS.
  • The ASICS is Mesh/synthetic upper with Gore-Tex waterproof membrane where the Converse is Canvas upper, rubber sole, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
  • The gap is 45 points, wide enough that this is not a close call, and the Converse is the one to buy.
  • We are less certain about the ASICS grade, at 45% confidence against 72%, because it discloses less.

Both products run through the same public rubric, which covers materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls, plus a beyond-PFAS hazard analysis. Grades are model-based estimates, not lab tests. How grades work →

More running & athletic shoes, see the full ranking