Aluminum 2030 vs 2065
Aluminum · grade comparison
Aluminum 2030 and 2065 are both aluminum grades. 2065 is the stronger of the two: yield strength 460 MPa (66.7 ksi) against 285 MPa (41.3 ksi) for 2030, about 61% more; tensile strength follows at 505 MPa (73.2 ksi) vs 400 MPa (58 ksi). In exchange, 2030 is the more ductile: elongation 12% versus 9% for 2065, and 2065 is harder (145 HB vs 100 HB). 2065 is lighter (2.7 g/cm³ vs 2.82 g/cm³ for 2030) and 2065 is stiffer (78 GPa vs 73 GPa). On the shop floor, 2030 machines more easily (excellent vs good), 2065 welds better (poor vs not recommended), and 2030 sits in a lower cost tier (premium, $$$) than 2065 (high, $$$$).
2030Choose it when the part is bent, formed or impact-loaded, or when the part is machined in volume.
2065Choose it when strength drives the design, or when weight is the constraint.
2030 vs 2065: propertiesHow to read these bars
- One bar per material. A full bar is the highest value among all aluminum grades in the FabDigit library; each bar is drawn as a share of that.
- The better value (by the usual engineering direction) is in bold. Rows with no direction — density, thermal conductivity — have no bold.
- Values are typical room-temperature figures for the condition named on each card.
- Confirm against the certified mill or resin datasheet before design release.
How to read these bars
- One bar per material. A full bar is the highest value among all aluminum grades in the FabDigit library; each bar is drawn as a share of that.
- The better value (by the usual engineering direction) is in bold. Rows with no direction — density, thermal conductivity — have no bold.
- Values are typical room-temperature figures for the condition named on each card.
- Confirm against the certified mill or resin datasheet before design release.
Mechanical
Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.
Elastic (Young's) Modulus
Shear Modulus
Tensile Strength (Ultimate)
Yield Strength (0.2% offset)
Elongation at Break
Shear Strength
Fatigue Strength (Endurance Limit)
Fracture Toughness (K_IC)
Hardness, Brinell
Hardness, Vickers
Compressive Strength
Same in both: Bulk Modulus 71 GPa10.3 Msi · Poisson's Ratio 0.33
Physical
Density and transition temperatures.
Density
Melting Point (Solidus)
Liquidus Temperature
Thermal
How each material carries heat and how hot it can run.
Thermal Conductivity
Specific Heat Capacity
Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)
Max Service Temperature (continuous)
Same in both: Latent Heat of Fusion 390 J/g168 BTU/lb · Min Service Temperature -196°C-321 °F
Electrical
Conductivity and insulation.
Electrical Conductivity
Electrical Resistivity
Chemical & Environmental
Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).
Galvanic Potential (seawater, vs SCE)
Corrosion Resistance
Manufacturability
FabDigit workshop ratings (0–100 scores) — how each material behaves on the machine.
Machinability
Machinability Rating (AISI 1212 = 100 %)
Weldability
Formability (cold)
Same in both: Brazeability / Solderability 10 / 100 · Polishability 55 / 100
Sustainability
Primary-production footprint per kilogram.
Embodied Energy (primary production)
Embodied Carbon (primary production)
Typical Recycled Content
Same in both: Embodied Water 1,200 L/kg144 gal/lb
Common Calculations
Ratios derived from the values above.
Specific Strength (UTS / density)
Specific Stiffness (E / density)
Modulus of Resilience
Thermal Diffusivity
Thermal Shock Resistance Index
Strength versus weight
Yield strength against density for every aluminum grade in the FabDigit library; the compared grades are highlighted. Up and left is stronger for its weight.
Manufacturing and finishing
| Capability | 2030 | 2065 |
|---|---|---|
| CNC machining | Yes | — |
| Sheet metal | Yes | — |
| Default condition | — | — |
| Relative cost | $$$ Premium | $$$$ High |
| Min. machined wall | 0.5 mm | — |
| Best machined surface | Ra 0.8 µm | — |
| Anodizing Type II | Yes | — |
| Cerakote | Yes | — |
| Chem Film (Alodine) | Yes | — |
| DLC | Yes | — |
| E-Coating | Yes | — |
| Electropolishing | Yes | — |
| Hard Anodize Type III w/ PTFE | Yes | — |
| Hard Anodizing Type III | Yes | — |
| Nickel Plating | Yes | — |
| PTFE Coating | Yes | — |
| Painting | Yes | — |
| Powder Coating | Yes | — |
They share 4 finishes: Electroless Nickel (EN), Epoxy Coating, Gold Plating, Silver Plating.
2030 vs 2065 — frequently asked
Is 2065 stronger than 2030?
Yes. 2065 has a typical yield strength of 460 MPa (66.7 ksi) against 285 MPa (41.3 ksi) for 2030 — about 61% more. Tensile strength is 505 MPa (73.2 ksi) vs 400 MPa (58 ksi).
Which is cheaper, 2030 or 2065?
2030 is the lower-cost material: it sits in the premium tier ($$$) while 2065 is high ($$$$). Part price depends far more on geometry, tolerance and quantity than on raw stock — upload a CAD file for a live quote.
Which is easier to machine, 2030 or 2065?
2030. Its machinability rates excellent (92/100) against good (62/100) for 2065; for welding the order is 2065 first (poor, 25/100) then 2030 (not recommended, 12/100).
Ready to make it?
Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in 2030 and 2065 side by side — material, machining time, tolerance and finish in one quote. Certified material data ships with the order on request.
Typical handbook values for the conditions named above, normalised for comparison. Hardness on non-Brinell scales is converted approximately for charting only. Request certified data with your order for design-critical properties.