Stealth RS II Hockey Shoulder Pads 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
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
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 moisture-resistant coating and Foam degradation and microparticle shedding 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 Foam, mesh, nylon with moisture-resistant/waterproof 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