Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C vs Men's Saucony Peregrine 16 GTX: 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.
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
Saucony
Men's Saucony Peregrine 16 GTX
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 0/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 5
Material
textile upper with GTX (Teflon-type coating-based) waterproof membrane
Confidence
65%
PossibleFormaldehyde resins (dyes and finishes)
PossibleAzo dyes
PossibleAntimony in polyester
Where these two actually differ
- We flag Azo dyes in canvas and Formaldehyde resin finishing on canvas on the Converse and not on the Saucony.
- We flag Formaldehyde resins (dyes and finishes), Azo dyes, Antimony in polyester and PTFE fume risk from membrane degradation on the Saucony and not on the Converse.
- The Converse is Canvas upper, rubber sole where the Saucony is textile upper with GTX (PTFE-based) waterproof membrane, 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.
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