Pro Style Shock Absorbing Pad vs Stealth RS II Hockey Shoulder Pads: which is safer?
Easton Pro Style Shock Absorbing Pad is our pick, better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Our pick
Easton
Pro Style Shock Absorbing Pad
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
Poor 49/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 4
Material
Foam padding, likely EVA or polyurethane
Confidence
72%
PossibleFormaldehyde in textile finishes
PossibleAzo dyes in shell fabric
PossibleAdhesive volatiles (VOC/off-gassing)
Easton
Stealth RS II Hockey Shoulder Pads
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 12/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 2
Material
Foam, mesh, nylon with moisture-resistant/waterproof coating
Confidence
35%
PossiblePFAS in moisture-resistant coating
PossibleFoam degradation and microparticle shedding
Where these two actually differ
- 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.
- We flag PFAS in moisture-resistant coating and Foam degradation and microparticle shedding on the Easton and not on the Easton.
- The Easton is Foam padding, likely EVA or polyurethane where the Easton is Foam, mesh, nylon with moisture-resistant/waterproof coating, 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 35% 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