Power Pad vs Pro Style Shock Absorbing Pad: which is safer?
Easton Pro Style Shock Absorbing Pad is our pick, better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Easton
Power Pad
PFAS grade
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
PossibleFluorinated water-repellent finish (PFAS class)
PossibleAntimony in polyester
PossibleMicrofiber shedding during washing
Our pick
Easton
Pro Style Shock Absorbing Pad
PFAS grade
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
PossibleFormaldehyde in textile finishes
PossibleAzo dyes in shell fabric
PossibleAdhesive volatiles (VOC/off-gassing)
Where these two actually differ
- We flag Fluorinated water-repellent finish (PFAS class), Antimony in polyester and Microfiber shedding during washing on the Easton and not on the Easton.
- We flag Formaldehyde in textile finishes, Azo dyes in shell fabric, Adhesive volatiles (VOC/off-gassing) and Microplastic shedding from foam breakdown on the Easton and not on the Easton.
- The Easton is nylon/polyester blend with moisture-wicking treatment where the Easton is Foam padding, likely EVA or polyurethane, 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 Easton is the one to buy.
- We are less certain about the Easton 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 sports equipment padding, see the full ranking