Chuck 70 HI 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.
Converse
Chuck 70 HI GTX
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 0/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 5
Material
Canvas/textile with GTX waterproof membrane
Confidence
45%
PossibleFormaldehyde resins in textile finishing
PossibleAzo dyes in canvas or rubber coloring
PossibleMembrane adhesive or coating leachates
Our pick
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 Formaldehyde resins in textile finishing, Azo dyes in canvas or rubber coloring, Membrane adhesive or coating leachates and Microplastic shedding from synthetic fibers and rubber on the Converse and not on the Converse.
- We flag Azo dyes in canvas and Formaldehyde resin finishing on canvas on the Converse and not on the Converse.
- The Converse is Canvas/textile with GTX 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 Converse grade, at 45% confidence against 72%, because it discloses less.
Both products run through the same public rubric: 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