Acushnet · Golf Balls & Golf Gloves
FootJoy Golf RainGrip Gloves
Skip until brand discloses water-repellent coating treatment chemistry.
Golf gloves with waterproof grip treatment. Acushnet discloses no PFAS information. water-repellent coating coatings commonly use PFAS, but treatment specifics unknown.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
Synthetic leather/microfiber with grip coating
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
Why this grade
Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment
water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.
Category baseline
clothing is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement about PFAS in this product.
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
FootJoy RainGrip gloves use synthetic microfiber leather with a grip-enhancing coating system designed to repel water while maintaining tactile feedback on club handles. Synthetic microfiber itself is polyester-based and does not inherently present lead, cadmium, or formaldehyde concerns at typical use levels. The critical unknown is the water-resistant finish (water-repellent coating): this is where PFAS compounds are commonly applied to synthetic sportswear, and Acushnet has not publicly disclosed whether this glove uses legacy PFAS, fluorine-free alternatives, or silicone-based water repellency.
The brand's record and disclosure
Acushnet (FootJoy's parent company) has not published a detailed PFAS or chemical management policy available in public databases as of known record. The brand has not voluntarily disclosed water-repellent coating chemistry for golf apparel products or committed to PFAS phase-out timelines comparable to outdoor/athletic brands like Patagonia or Arc'teryx. No major recalls or hazard complaints specific to FootJoy gloves for chemical contamination have been documented; however, silence on water-repellent coating treatment is a notable transparency gap for a premium sports brand.
How it compares in its category
Golf gloves are a niche category with limited third-party testing data. Compared to general synthetic sportswear, golf gloves see lower-intensity and lower-frequency water exposure (occasional rain during rounds rather than immersion or sweat saturation), which may reduce both leaching risk and the practical need for persistent PFAS-based water repellency. Many competitors (e.g., Titleist, TaylorMade) also do not publicly disclose water-repellent coating chemistry, making this glove typical in the lack of transparency rather than an outlier.
If you buy it
Wash gloves by hand in cool water and air-dry away from direct heat; avoid machine washing and hot dryers, which can degrade grip coatings and potentially accelerate any coating degradation that might release particles. Replace gloves when grip coating visibly peels, cracks, or loses water repellency, typically after one to three seasons depending on frequency of use and care. Consider requesting Acushnet's chemical disclosure or certification (e.g., OEKO-TEX, bluesign) before purchase if PFAS avoidance is a priority; storing in a dry place prolongs life and reduces need for re-waterproofing.
Beyond PFAS: other things we checked
Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”
Water-resistant (water-repellent coating) coating chemistry (PFAS status unknown)
Acushnet has not disclosed whether this glove's water-repellent finish uses traditional PFAS (PFOA/PFOS), short-chain PFAS alternatives, or non-fluorine methods. Without transparency, legacy PFAS exposure cannot be ruled out, particularly if the glove is worn frequently and in direct contact with skin on warm days.
Synthetic microfiber shedding under mechanical stress
Polyester microfiber gloves do not have established documented risk of significant microfiber release during normal golfing use (low abrasion compared to washing or athletic friction). No recalls or complaints specific to FootJoy gloves for microfiber shedding have been reported.
Grip coating degradation and particle release
The grip coating (likely rubber or synthetic polymer composite) can crack and peel with age, repeated washing, or heat exposure. Degradation particles are unlikely to pose acute toxicity risk but may be inhaled or ingested in trace amounts; replacement when visual degradation occurs is the appropriate mitigation.
Azo dyes in synthetic leather or colored microfiber
Synthetic leather and polyester microfiber are standard textile materials; FootJoy does not carry known associations with problematic azo dye use. No documented recalls or safety concerns specific to dye chemistry in this product line.
Formaldehyde or formaldehyde releasers in fabric finishing
Synthetic microfiber golf gloves are not typically finished with formaldehyde-based resins (unlike wrinkle-resistant cotton garments). No documented formaldehyde safety concerns have been reported for FootJoy gloves.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 35% confidence. It is not a lab result.
No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.
The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.
Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.
Safer alternatives in Golf Balls & Golf Gloves
Bridgestone
Men's Pair Golf Gloves
Leather, synthetic leather, or textile blend
Lower PFAS concern, but brand provides no transparency.
⚠Risky category by default
Bridgestone
Soft Grip Golf Glove
Leather, synthetic grip material, textiles
Lower concern. Golf glove without known waterproofing or Teflon-family coating treatment.
⚠Risky category by default
Bridgestone
Lady Golf Glove
Synthetic leather or leather with standard stitching
Golf glove with typical materials, lower concern profile.
⚠Risky category by default
More golf balls & golf gloves 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.