PFAS40/ 100Poor
Overall14/ 100Bad
Cobra StormGrip Winter Golf Gloves

Cobra · Golf Balls & Equipment

Cobra StormGrip Winter Golf Gloves

Poor

Winter golf glove with water-repellent coating; PFAS disclosure absent, higher concern.

Verdict · SkipSynthetic winter glove with undisclosed water-resistant coating; PFAS concern plus standard textile risks warrant careful use and disclosure demand.

Winter golf glove with synthetic materials and water-resistant treatment typical of cold-weather sports apparel. Cobra provides no PFAS information.

The better-graded swap

Bridgestone Lady Precept Double Dozen Golf Balls

Precept

Bridgestone Lady Precept Double Dozen Golf Balls

85/100 safety

85Excellent

Same rubric that flunked this product. The swap earned Excellent.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

synthetic leather/microfiber with water-resistant treatment

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement from the brand about PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.

90/ 100
♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

Water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.

65/ 100
♾️

PFAS

No disclosure from Cobra on whether this glove uses fluorinated or fluorine-free water-repellent coating. Winter golf gloves marketed with 'storm' or water-resistant claims almost always use topical coatings; historically these are PFAS-based. The coating is contact-level exposure during wear and may leach slightly during washing.

Source, ATSDR
20/ 100

Synthetic leather (polyurethane/PVC) degradation

Synthetic leather degrades with flexing and heat, especially in microfiber gloves subject to repeated hand grip and weather exposure. Degradation releases microplastics and can off-gas volatile organic compounds (VOCs) at low levels. This is a use-life issue, not an acute hazard, but relevant for long-term wear.

70/ 100
🫧

Microfiber shedding

Microfiber linings shed fine synthetic particles during washing and wear. In small amounts this is a nuisance; in aggregate from frequent washing it contributes to aquatic microplastic load. Gloves are lower-risk than textiles with larger surface area, but still relevant for environmentally conscious users.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

⛏️

Heavy metals

No recalls or public health reports linked to Cobra StormGrip colorants. Synthetic leather and microfiber are typically dyed with modern azo dyes, which are regulated but can release aromatic amines under certain conditions. No specific testing of this product is available.

Source, FDA
95/ 100
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

Glove assembly may use formaldehyde-releasing adhesives between synthetic leather and lining layers. This is standard in the category and typically off-gasses minimally in the glove format, but no third-party testing of this brand is on record.

Source, ATSDR
95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Cobra StormGrip gloves combine synthetic leather (likely polyurethane or PVC) with microfiber lining and a water-resistant (water-repellent coating) topcoat. The water-repellent coating treatment is the primary chemical concern, most spray-applied water-repellent finishes historically relied on fluorinated compounds (PFAS), though some brands now use fluorine-free alternatives. Cobra has not publicly disclosed which technology is used in this model. Synthetic leather itself is generally lower-risk than natural leather, but polyurethane degradation and microfiber shedding under wear are documented issues in textiles.

The brand's record and disclosure

Cobra (owned by Puma/TaylorMade) does not maintain a publicly accessible chemicals or PFAS disclosure policy for apparel products. No independent certifications (Bluesign, OEKO-TEX, GOTS) are claimed for these gloves on product pages. The brand has not responded to retail or advocacy inquiries about fluorinated water-repellent use in winter sportswear. This silence is noteworthy, major golf and athletic brands (Nike, Adidas) have committed to PFAS phase-out; Cobra's lack of transparency suggests either legacy formulations or indifference to disclosure.

How it compares in its category

Winter golf gloves occupy a middle ground for chemical risk. Performance brands (Footjoy, TaylorMade) typically use the same water-repellent coating technologies without always disclosing them either. Budget alternatives (generic PVC gloves) often skip water-repellent coating entirely, reducing PFAS exposure but sacrificing durability. Premium options (some merino wool blends) may avoid synthetic coatings altogether. Cobra positions itself as a performance brand, so the absence of transparency is less defensible than for budget lines.

If you buy it

Wash gloves in cool water with mild detergent before first use to reduce loose dyes and finishes. Avoid hot water and machine drying, which accelerates microfiber breakdown and polyurethane degradation. Store in a cool, dry place to prevent mildew (moisture + synthetic materials can off-gas low levels of volatile compounds). Replace when water no longer beads on the surface, typically after 1-2 seasons of regular use; degraded coatings lose water resistance and may shed particles. Demand Cobra's water-repellent coating chemical specification via customer service; lack of response is a red flag.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 45% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Cobra has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

Better-graded alternatives in Golf Balls & Equipment

Vice Drip Golf Balls

Vice Golf

Vice Drip Golf Balls

synthetic polymer core with urethane/elastomer cover

PFAS Grade85Excellent
Overall Grade85Excellent
Excellent

PFAS unlikely. Brand silent on composition details.

Brand says nothing about PFAS

Bridgestone Men's Pair Golf Gloves

Bridgestone

Men's Pair Golf Gloves

Leather, synthetic leather, or textile blend

PFAS Grade85Excellent
Overall Grade59Good
⚠️

Chromium in leather tanning residue

Limited concern

70
🎨

Azo dyes in colored leather or synthetic components

Limited concern

70
⛏️

Heavy metals

Limited concern

70

Lower PFAS concern, but brand provides no transparency.

Brand says nothing about PFAS

Bridgestone Lady Golf Glove

Bridgestone

Lady Golf Glove

Synthetic leather or leather with standard stitching

PFAS Grade85Excellent
Overall Grade59Good
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

Limited concern

70
🫧

Microplastic shedding from synthetic leather

Limited concern

70

Golf glove with typical materials, lower concern profile.

Brand says nothing about PFAS

More golf balls & equipment grades

How we score, every product runs through the same public 0-100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.