FabDigitFabDigit

PET vs PTT

Polymer · grade comparison

PET and PTT are both polymer grades. PET is the stronger of the two: yield strength 80 MPa (11.6 ksi) against 58 MPa (8.41 ksi) for PTT, about 38% more; tensile strength follows at 82 MPa (11.9 ksi) vs 62 MPa (8.99 ksi). In exchange, PTT is the more ductile: elongation 25% versus 20% for PET, and PET is harder (85 Shore D vs 78 Shore D). PTT is lighter (1.32 g/cm³ vs 1.39 g/cm³ for PET) and PET is stiffer (3.1 GPa vs 2.7 GPa). On the shop floor, PET machines more easily (very good vs good) and PTT welds better (very good vs fair).

PETChoose it when strength drives the design, or when the part sees heat.

PTTChoose it when the part is bent, formed or impact-loaded, or when weight is the constraint.

PET vs PTT: properties

PETPTT

Mechanical

Strength, stiffness, ductility and hardness at room temperature.

Elastic (Young's) Modulus

3.1 GPa0.45 Msi
2.7 GPa0.39 Msi

Shear Modulus

1.1 GPa0.16 Msi
0.95 GPa0.14 Msi

Tensile Strength (Ultimate)

82 MPa11.9 ksi
62 MPa9 ksi

Yield Strength (0.2% offset)

80 MPa11.6 ksi
58 MPa8.4 ksi

Elongation at Break

20%
25%

Compressive Strength

100 MPa14.5 ksi
75 MPa10.9 ksi

Compressive Modulus

3 GPa0.44 Msi
2.5 GPa0.36 Msi

Flexural Strength

120 MPa17.4 ksi
90 MPa13.1 ksi

Flexural Modulus

3.1 GPa0.45 Msi
2.6 GPa0.38 Msi

Shear Strength

55 MPa8 ksi
45 MPa6.5 ksi

Fracture Toughness (K_IC)

4 MPa·√m3.6 ksi·√in
—

Izod Impact, Notched

40 J/m0.75 ft·lbf/in
45 J/m0.84 ft·lbf/in

Hardness, Shore D

85 Shore D
78 Shore D

Hardness, Rockwell M

94 HRM
72 HRM

Hardness, Rockwell R

120 HRR
117 HRR

Same in both: Bulk Modulus 5 GPa0.65 Msi · Poisson's Ratio 0.4

Physical

Density and transition temperatures.

Density

1.39 g/cm³0.05 lb/in³
1.32 g/cm³0.05 lb/in³

Melting Temperature (Tm)

255°C491 °F
228°C442 °F

Glass Transition (Tg)

79°C174 °F
50°C122 °F

Water Absorption (24 h)

0.11%
0.15%

Water Absorption (Saturation)

0.5%
0.4%

Refractive Index

1.575
1.6

Light Transmission

88%
—

Thermal

How each material carries heat and how hot it can run.

Thermal Conductivity

0.25 W/m·K0.14 BTU/hr·ft·°F
0.21 W/m·K0.12 BTU/hr·ft·°F

Specific Heat Capacity

1,150 J/kg·K0.27 BTU/lb·°F
1,350 J/kg·K0.32 BTU/lb·°F

Thermal Expansion (CTE, 20–100 °C)

65 µm/m·K36.1 µin/in·°F
80 µm/m·K44.4 µin/in·°F

Max Service Temperature (continuous)

100°C212 °F
90°C194 °F

Min Service Temperature

-20°C-4 °F
-40°C-40 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 0.45 MPa

115°C239 °F
110°C230 °F

Heat Deflection Temp. @ 1.8 MPa

80°C176 °F
62°C144 °F

Vicat Softening Point (B50)

180°C356 °F
175°C347 °F

Max Service Temperature (short-term)

150°C302 °F
140°C284 °F

Same in both: Limiting Oxygen Index 22%

Electrical

Conductivity and insulation.

Same in both: Electrical Resistivity 1×10¹⁴ Ω·m3.94×10²¹ µΩ·in · Dielectric Strength 22 kV/mm559 V/mil · Dielectric Constant (1 MHz) 3.2 · Dissipation Factor (1 MHz) 0.018 · Volume Resistivity 1×10¹⁶ Ω·cm · Surface Resistivity 1×10¹⁵ Ω · Comparative Tracking Index (CTI) 600 V

Chemical & Environmental

Corrosion and environmental resistance (0–100 scores).

Corrosion Resistance

70 / 100
78 / 100

UV / Weathering Resistance

30 / 100
45 / 100

Manufacturability

FabDigit workshop ratings (0–100 scores) — how each material behaves on the machine.

Machinability

78 / 100
65 / 100

Weldability

45 / 100
70 / 100

Mold Shrinkage

2%
1.8%

Processing Melt Temperature (typ.)

280°C536 °F
250°C482 °F

Mold Temperature (typ.)

135°C275 °F
60°C140 °F

Melt Flow Rate

—
30 g/10 min

Same in both: Formability (cold) 50 / 100 · Polishability 60 / 100

Sustainability

Primary-production footprint per kilogram.

Embodied Energy (primary production)

82 MJ/kg35,254 BTU/lb
70 MJ/kg30,095 BTU/lb

Embodied Carbon (primary production)

2.8 kg CO₂/kg
3 kg CO₂/kg

Embodied Water

120 L/kg14.4 gal/lb
130 L/kg15.6 gal/lb

Typical Recycled Content

25%
0%

Common Calculations

Ratios derived from the values above.

Specific Strength (UTS / density)

59 kN·m/kg
47 kN·m/kg

Specific Stiffness (E / density)

2.2 MN·m/kg
2 MN·m/kg

Modulus of Resilience

1,032 kJ/m³
623 kJ/m³

Thermal Diffusivity

0.2 mm²/s
0.1 mm²/s

Same in both: Thermal Shock Resistance Index 0

Strength versus weight

Yield strength against density for every polymer grade in the FabDigit library; the compared grades are highlighted. Up and left is stronger for its weight.

0.1110100123Density (g/cm³)Yield strength (MPa) — log scalePETPTT

Manufacturing and finishing

CapabilityPETPTT
CNC machiningYes—
Sheet metalYes—
Injection moldingYes—
Default conditionUnfilled—
Relative cost$$ Standard$$ Standard
Min. machined wall0.5 mm—
Best machined surfaceRa 0.8 µm—
Chrome Plating (Plastic)Yes—
EMI Shielding CoatingYes—
PaintingYes—
Soft Touch CoatingYes—
Spray PaintingYes—
UV CoatingYes—

PET vs PTT — frequently asked

Is PET stronger than PTT?

Yes. PET has a typical yield strength of 80 MPa (11.6 ksi) against 58 MPa (8.41 ksi) for PTT — about 38% more. Tensile strength is 82 MPa (11.9 ksi) vs 62 MPa (8.99 ksi).

Which is cheaper, PET or PTT?

Both sit in the same relative cost tier ($$, standard); the part price will be decided by machining time, tolerance and quantity rather than by the material.

Which is easier to machine, PET or PTT?

PET. Its machinability rates very good (78/100) against good (65/100) for PTT; for welding the order is PTT first (very good, 70/100) then PET (fair, 45/100).

Ready to make it?

Upload a CAD file and FabDigit prices the part in PET and PTT 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.