Sliding Knee Pad vs Universal Padding Fit Kit: which is safer?
Easton Universal Padding Fit Kit is our pick: better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Easton
Sliding Knee Pad
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 0/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 4
Material
nylon/spandex blend with moisture-wicking water-repellent coating
Confidence
35%
LikelyPFAS in water-repellent coating
PossibleFormaldehyde resins in fabric finish
ReportedSpandex degradation under heat and UV
Our pick
Easton
Universal Padding Fit Kit
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
Poor 43/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 4
Material
foam padding, elastic straps
Confidence
72%
PossiblePolyurethane foam off-gassing (VOCs)
PossibleAdhesive leachables
PossibleElastic synthetic fiber irritation
Where these two actually differ
- We flag PFAS in DWR coating, Formaldehyde resins in fabric finish, Spandex degradation under heat and UV and Allergen potential from dyes or finishes on the Easton and not on the Easton.
- We flag Polyurethane foam off-gassing (VOCs), Adhesive leachables, Elastic synthetic fiber irritation and Foam fragmentation and inhalation on the Easton and not on the Easton.
- The Easton is nylon/spandex blend with moisture-wicking DWR coating where the Easton is foam padding, elastic straps, 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: 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