PFAS20/ 100Bad
Overall2/ 100Bad
Saucony Women's Excursion TR17

Saucony · Running & Athletic Shoes

Saucony Women's Excursion TR17

Bad

Trail running shoe likely treated; water-repellent coating unknown, brand silent.

Verdict · SkipTrail shoe with silent PFAS stance and unknown water-repellent coating chemistry; formaldehyde-resin risk in synthetic mesh typical of category; acceptable if cared for and replaced on schedule.

Saucony does not disclose PFAS in this trail shoe. Modern outdoor footwear often uses water-resistant coatings that may contain PFAS, but specific treatment details are unavailable.

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

Material

Synthetic mesh, foam, rubber sole with water-repellent coating

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

Water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.

65/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

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

70/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

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

85/ 100
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

Synthetic mesh uppers in trail shoes typically receive formaldehyde-based resins for durability and wrinkle resistance. Saucony does not disclose the specific finish chemistry for the Excursion TR17, so resin type and release potential cannot be confirmed but are consistent with category norms.

Source, ATSDR
70/ 100
🍳

water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coating chemistry

The water-repellent coating treatment on this shoe is not chemically identified by Saucory or in available product documentation. Many trail shoe manufacturers use PFAS-based water-repellent coating agents; this product's coating identity and PFAS status are unknown (noted separately as PFAS grade Bad/20). Non-PFAS water-repellent coating alternatives exist but are not confirmed here.

45/ 100
🫧

Foam degradation and micro-particle shedding

Polyurethane or EVA foam midsoles degrade with age and use, especially above 300-500 miles or if exposed to heat or solvents. Small fragments may be inhaled or transferred; replacement on schedule mitigates this. This is a normal wear-out hazard, not a manufacturing defect specific to Saucony.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Azo dyes in synthetic mesh and rubber

No specific documentation of azo-dye restrictions or testing for the Excursion TR17. Synthetic mesh and rubber sole are potential sources, but no established contamination or recall is on record for this model or Saucony trail footwear.

95/ 100

Antimony in polyester content

Polyester textiles may contain antimony (a processing catalyst), typically in trace amounts. No test data or concern notice is on record for Saucony or this shoe model; antimony risk from apparel is generally considered low in normal use.

95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

The Excursion TR17 uses synthetic mesh (likely polyester or nylon blend) for the upper, foam midsole, and rubber outsole with a water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coating. Synthetic mesh uppers commonly receive formaldehyde-releasing finishes to improve wrinkle and shape retention; the specific resin type in this shoe is not disclosed by Saucony. Foam midsoles are generally inert during normal wear, though degradation over 300-500 miles can release micro-fragments. The water-repellent coating treatment is the primary chemical concern, as the coating identity and PFAS content remain undisclosed.

The brand's record and disclosure

Saucony has not published a comprehensive PFAS or chemical disclosure policy as of available records. The brand does not list certifications such as bluesign, OEKO-TEX, or similar textile chemical standards for this model. No major recalls or contamination incidents have been publicly associated with Saucony trail footwear. Lack of transparency on water-repellent coating chemistry and formaldehyde-resin use is typical across the running shoe industry but remains a disclosure gap.

How it compares in its category

Most trail running shoes in this price and performance tier use similar synthetic mesh with undisclosed water-repellent coating treatments and formaldehyde finishes. Competitors (New Balance, ASICS, Salomon) do not routinely disclose these details either. Some premium alternatives pursue bluesign or OEKO-TEX certification, but the Excursion TR17 does not. For budget-friendly trail shoes, chemical transparency across the category is limited; this model is neither notably worse nor better on that front.

If you buy it

Air the shoes outdoors for 24-48 hours after purchase to allow initial off-gassing of formaldehyde-resin and adhesive fumes. Wash mesh upper by hand with mild soap and water; avoid machine drying above 95°F (35°C) to prevent foam breakdown. Replace the shoe after 300-500 miles of use or when midsole compression becomes visible, as aged foam may shed micro-fragments. Do not machine wash, bleach, or expose to prolonged heat, as these accelerate coating and adhesive breakdown.

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
Saucony has made none

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

Better-graded alternatives in Running & Athletic Shoes

New Balance Women's Fresh Foam Arishi v4 Shoes

New Balance

Women's Fresh Foam Arishi v4 Shoes

Mesh upper, Fresh Foam midsole, rubber outsole

PFAS Grade65Good
Overall Grade57Good
🎨

Azo dyes and color-based toxins

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Antimony in polyester

Limited concern

70

Standard athletic shoe with no known PFAS triggers, but no brand disclosure.

Starting grade for this product type

New Balance Men's Fresh Foam X Hierro v9

New Balance

Men's Fresh Foam X Hierro v9

Knit textile upper, foam midsole, rubber outsole

PFAS Grade65Good
Overall Grade53Good
🎨

Azo dyes and textile colorants

Limited concern

70
💨

Foam off-gassing (midsole)

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Antimony in polyester components

Limited concern

70

No coating described, and no PFAS statement from the brand.

Starting grade for this product type

ASICS Men's Trail Scout 3

ASICS

Men's Trail Scout 3

Mesh textile upper with synthetic overlays, rubber outsole

PFAS Grade65Good
Overall Grade51Good
⚠️

Antimony in polyester fibers

Limited concern

70

Coating degradation and leachables from adhesives

Moderate concern

45

No coating described, and no PFAS statement from the brand.

Starting grade for this product type

More running & athletic shoes 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.