Your existing glove spec says "Level 3." The supplier catalog in front of you says A4. A European datasheet describes what looks like the same glove as a "C." None of those are typos, and only one of them is written to the current standard. Here is how cut resistance is actually measured, what A1 through A9 mean in grams, and how to land on a level without over-buying.
How cut resistance is measured
Cut testing under ANSI/ISEA 105 uses ASTM F2992-15 on a TDM-100 tomodynamometer. A straight blade is drawn across a flat sample taken from the glove under a known load, and the test records the load, expressed in grams, that cuts through the material within 20 mm of blade travel. A new blade is used for every single cut. That last detail is the whole point of the method: blade dulling was the flaw that made older test approaches unreliable at the high end.
The rating on a glove is that gram figure sorted into a band. It is a material property measured on a flat coupon. It is not a promise about your specific task, and it says nothing about puncture, needlestick or abrasion.
The A1 to A9 scale
| Level | Cutting load (grams) | Hazard band |
|---|---|---|
| A1 | 200 to 499 | Light |
| A2 | 500 to 999 | Light to medium |
| A3 | 1,000 to 1,499 | Light to medium |
| A4 | 1,500 to 2,199 | Medium to heavy |
| A5 | 2,200 to 2,999 | Medium to heavy |
| A6 | 3,000 to 3,999 | Medium to heavy |
| A7 | 4,000 to 4,999 | Medium to heavy |
| A8 | 5,000 to 5,999 | Heavy to high |
| A9 | 6,000 and above | Heavy to high |
The bands are deliberately uneven. They are narrow through the middle of the range, where most purchasing decisions are actually made, and open up at A9 with no ceiling. That structure was introduced in ANSI/ISEA 105-2016 to close a gap that the old scale left wide open.
Why your old "Level 3" spec no longer maps
The 2005 and 2011 editions used a 0 to 5 scale measured under ASTM F1790, a method that permitted more than one machine and, in its earlier revision, 25 mm of blade travel. The thresholds were: Level 0 under 200 g, Level 1 at 200 g and up, Level 2 at 500 g, Level 3 at 1,000 g, Level 4 at 1,500 g, and Level 5 at 3,500 g and up.
| Old level (2005/2011) | Threshold | Nearest current level |
|---|---|---|
| Level 1 | 200 g and up | A1 |
| Level 2 | 500 g and up | A2 |
| Level 3 | 1,000 g and up | A3 |
| Level 4 | 1,500 g and up | A4 |
| Level 5 | 3,500 g and up | Anywhere from A6 to A9 |
The old Level 5 is the problem child. A glove that barely cleared 3,500 g and a glove that stopped 6,000 g were both labelled Level 5, so a single bucket covered what is now four separate levels. If you are rewriting an old specification, do not translate Level 5 as A5. A modern A5 tops out at 2,999 g, which is below the old Level 5 threshold. Go back to the task and specify upward from there.
How this compares with EN 388
EN 388:2016+A1:2018 reports a row of results rather than one number. Two of them are cut ratings: the older coup test, in which a rotating circular blade cuts the sample, and the same TDM method ANSI uses, run to ISO 13997 and reported in newtons as letters A through F.
| EN 388 property | Levels and values |
|---|---|
| Abrasion (cycles) | 1: 100, 2: 500, 3: 2,000, 4: 8,000 |
| Cut, coup test (index) | 1: 1.2, 2: 2.5, 3: 5.0, 4: 10.0, 5: 20.0 |
| Tear (newtons) | 1: 10, 2: 25, 3: 50, 4: 75 |
| Puncture (newtons) | 1: 20, 2: 60, 3: 100, 4: 150 |
| Cut, ISO 13997 TDM (newtons) | A: 2, B: 5, C: 10, D: 15, E: 22, F: 30 |
Because one newton is roughly 102 grams of force, the EN letters and the ANSI A-levels are the same measurement in different units. EN's top grade, F at 30 N, lands in the region of 3,000 g, which is only the bottom of ANSI's A6. In other words the European letter scale stops where the American scale still has four levels to run. The coup test is the one to treat with suspicion on high-performance materials, because the blade dulls during the test and can flatter or distort the result. If a datasheet gives you a coup index and you need an ANSI level, ask the manufacturer for the ASTM F2992 gram value instead of converting it yourself.
Abrasion and puncture
Cut level alone will not get a glove through a shift. A palm coating that wears through in two days fails at A5 just as surely as at A1.
| Level | Abrasion: cycles to failure (load) | Puncture: force (newtons) |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Under 100 (500 g) | Under 10 |
| 1 | 100 and up (500 g) | 10 and up |
| 2 | 500 and up (500 g) | 20 and up |
| 3 | 1,000 and up (500 g) | 60 and up |
| 4 | 3,000 and up (1,000 g) | 100 and up |
| 5 | 10,000 and up (1,000 g) | 150 and up |
| 6 | 20,000 and up (1,000 g) | Not applicable |
Abrasion runs 0 to 6 and puncture 0 to 5, so a "5" means very different things in the two columns; read the label in order rather than reading a single digit. The puncture figure here comes from a blunt probe, and it is not a hypodermic needlestick rating, which ANSI/ISEA 105 treats as a separate test with its own result.
What changed in ANSI/ISEA 105-2024
The current edition introduces a standardized pentagon pictogram that carries cut, abrasion and puncture results in one mark. Before that, every brand drew its own shield or badge, which made shelf comparison close to impossible. An X on any point of the pentagon means the glove was not tested for that property, which is not the same as scoring low. The 2024 revision also brings sleeves and arm protection into the scope of the standard, clarifies how abrasion testing is executed, updates the conductive heat classifications, and removes dexterity and anti-vibration provisions.
Matching a level to the task
- A1 to A3 for packaging, assembly, general material handling and warehouse work. Prioritize grip and fit here; a nitrile-coated knit such as the Ergodyne ProFlex 7042 or the TruForce cut-resistant glove gets worn all shift, which is what actually prevents injuries.
- A4 to A6 for construction, sheet metal, glass handling, HVAC and blade work in food processing. Compare palm coating and cuff length alongside the cut level.
- A7 to A9 for deliberate blade contact, recycling and sorting lines, metal stamping, and oil and gas. Expect to trade dexterity for it, and plan the task around that.
Three cautions before you buy. No glove is cut-proof; the level describes how much load the material resists, not that it cannot be cut through. Over-specifying costs you protection as well as money, because a stiff A7 glove that gets pulled off for fine work protects nobody, while a well-fitting A4 kept on the hand does. And the cut level says nothing at all about chemicals: if solvents, fuels or acids are in play, that is a chemical-resistant glove decision made from a permeation chart, and general handling, driving and hot work still belong to leather and work gloves or a coated option like the KleenGuard G40.
Forearms deserve the same treatment. Since the 2024 revision covers arm protection as well as gloves, a protective sleeve can be specified on the same basis as the glove it works with. Start from the hazard, then browse the current cut-resistant gloves and the wider hand and arm protection range with the level and the coating decided in advance.
This guide is educational. Selection and compliance remain the employer's responsibility under the applicable standard.