Pro Style Shock Absorbing Pad vs MCB67 Umpire's Leg Guards: 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
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
PossibleFormaldehyde in textile finishes
PossibleAzo dyes in shell fabric
PossibleAdhesive volatiles (VOC/off-gassing)
MacGregor
MCB67 Umpire's Leg Guards
PFAS grade
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
LikelyMoisture-resistant coating degradation and inhalation
PossibleIrritation from undisclosed additives in padding
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 MacGregor.
- We flag Moisture-resistant coating degradation and inhalation and Irritation from undisclosed additives in padding on the MacGregor and not on the Easton.
- The Easton is Foam padding, likely EVA or polyurethane where the MacGregor is Padded nylon/polyester with moisture-resistant treatment, 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.
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