20/ 100
F
OverallF16/100
Cobra Microgrip Flex Mens Golf Glove

Cobra · Golf Equipment & Apparel

Cobra Microgrip Flex Mens Golf Glove

F · High PFAS

Likely lower concern; water-repellent coating treatment source unclear, no disclosure available.

Verdict: SkipLeather golf glove with minimal documented chemical hazards; water-repellent coating treatment opacity is the only concern, manageable through care.

Golf glove combines leather and synthetics with water-resistant finish. Cobra makes no PFAS statements; water-repellent coating source unknown but typical for performance gloves.

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

Material

Leather and synthetic with water-repellent coating treatment

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.

Hurts the grade

Category baseline

clothing is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.

Hurts the grade

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement about PFAS in this product.

Hurts the grade

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

The Cobra Microgrip Flex combines leather (likely sheepskin or goat leather typical of golf gloves) with synthetic overlays on the palm and fingers for grip and durability. Leather itself carries low inherent chemical toxicity when tanned with chrome or vegetable methods, but the water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish applied to the synthetic portions is the material wild card, this finish often relies on fluorinated compounds, though Cobra has not disclosed the specific chemistry. The synthetic materials are typically polyamide or polyester blends, which under normal hand-use conditions do not leach or shed microplastics.

The brand's record and disclosure

Cobra (owned by Puma/Sumitomo) does not publicly disclose chemical composition, tanning method, or water-repellent coating chemistry for its golf gloves. No product-specific recalls or safety controversies are on record for this glove. The brand has not signed major chemical transparency pledges like ZDHC or Cradle to Cradle for apparel. Silence on water-repellent coating sourcing is typical across golf-glove manufacturers but reflects a gap in consumer transparency rather than evidence of hazard.

How it compares in its category

Golf gloves as a category are lower-risk than many textiles because hand-contact time is brief and intermittent, and they are worn outdoors with minimal skin contact duration. The Cobra sits in the mainstream golf-glove market, leather with synthetic reinforcement and water-repellent coating treatment, placing it alongside Titleist, TaylorMade, and Callaway offerings. Alternatives made entirely of leather without water-repellent coating would eliminate the fluorochemical question but lose water resistance; fully synthetic gloves present equivalent water-repellent coating uncertainty. This product's risk profile is typical for the segment.

If you buy it

Wash the glove by hand in cool water with mild soap after use, especially if exposed to moisture or heavy sweat, to avoid buildup of salt and skin oils that degrade the leather. Avoid hot water, machine washing, and direct heat drying, which can crack leather and degrade the water-repellent coating finish. Replace the glove when the palm synthetic shows visible wear or loss of grip; leather typically outlasts synthetic overlays by 1-2 seasons. Store dry and flat to prevent mildew and mold growth.

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.”

Possible

water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish, fluorinated chemistry

Cobra has not disclosed whether the water-repellent coating treatment uses legacy PFOA/PFOS-class chemicals, GenX, or newer short-chain alternatives. water-repellent coating on golf-glove synthetic panels typically does not migrate to skin under normal use, but the chemical class and manufacturing residues remain undisclosed.

None known

Leather tanning residues

No specific tanning method is disclosed. Chrome tanning (most common) leaves residual chromium(III), which is not acutely toxic in leather at resting state but can leach into sweat under acidic, prolonged contact. Golf-glove contact is brief and intermittent, minimizing this risk. Vegetable tanning eliminates this concern but is rare in performance gloves.

None known

Azo dyes in synthetic or leather coloring

No product testing or recall data exists for azo-dye contamination in this glove. Golf gloves are typically colored with standard industrial dyes; if black or dark synthetic overlays are present, azo-dye use is plausible but unconfirmed. Skin contact is brief and localized.

None known

Formaldehyde-based finishing resins

Golf gloves may receive formaldehyde-containing durable-press or stiffness-retention treatments on synthetic components. No specific disclosure or testing data is available for the Cobra Microgrip. Off-gassing risk is very low given the product's indoor/outdoor mixed use and hand-only contact area.

None known

Synthetic shedding and microplastic release

Polyamide or polyester overlays on the palm do not shed microplastics under normal hand-use wear. Abrasion against golf clubs or grip material does not generate visible fiber loss. Risk is negligible compared to synthetic textiles subject to washing and mechanical stress.

What we don’t know

This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 45% 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 Equipment & Apparel

Cobra Pur Tech '26 Left Golf Glove

Cobra

Pur Tech '26 Left Golf Glove

Leather or synthetic leather with standard stitching

D
F
PFASAll
D · Elevated3 flags

Golf glove, low PFAS risk.

Risky category by default

Honma Golf Gloves Speed Monster Men's White 6 Pcs Set M L Xl

Honma

Golf Gloves Speed Monster Men's White 6 Pcs Set M L Xl

Synthetic leather or polyurethane palm with fabric backing

D
F
PFASAll
D · Elevated4 flags

Lower concern. Golf gloves typically avoid PFAS-prone coatings.

Risky category by default

Honma Golf Gloves Speed Monster Men's M Size White 3 Set Stretch & Fit

Honma

Golf Gloves Speed Monster Men's M Size White 3 Set Stretch & Fit

Stretch fabric blend, likely polyester/spandex with synthetic grips

D
F
PFASAll
D · Elevated2 flags

Golf glove with no known PFAS concerns, no disclosure found.

Risky category by default

More golf equipment & apparel 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.