The difference between “ABS material” and “PP material” is:
1. Different molding temperature;
2. Different performance and use
Specific differences:
1.Different molding temperatures
ABS material molding temperature: 200-240℃
Drying conditions: 80-90℃ 2 hours,
PP material molding temperature: 160-220℃,
Specific gravity: 0.9-0.91 g/cm3
Molding shrinkage: 1.0-2.5%
ABS material features:
Excellent overall performance, high impact strength, chemical stability, and good electrical properties.
It welds well with 372 plexiglass, allowing for two-color plastic parts. It can also be chrome-plated or painted.
Available in high-impact, high-heat, flame-retardant, reinforced, and transparent grades.
Its fluidity is slightly lower than HIPS, but better than PMMA and PC, and it exhibits excellent flexibility.
Applications: Suitable for general mechanical parts, wear-resistant and anti-friction parts,transmission components, and telecommunications components.
PP material molding performance
PP is crystalline material with low hygroscopicity. It is prone to melt fracture and easy to decompose in long-term contact with hot metal.
It has good fluidity, but the shrinkage range and shrinkage value are large, and it is easy to cause shrinkage holes, dents, and deformation.
The cooling speed is fast, and the pouring system and cooling system should slowly dissipate heat, and pay attention to controlling the molding temperature.
The directionality of the material is obvious at low temperature. It is especially obvious at low temperature and high pressure.
When the mold temperature is below 50 degrees, the plastic part is not smooth, and it is easy to produce poor welding and leaving marks. Warping and deformation are prone to occur above 90 degrees.
The plastic wall thickness must be uniform to avoid glue shortage and sharp corners to prevent stress concentration.
Application: Suitable for making general mechanical parts, corrosion-resistant parts and insulating parts.
Which material is better, ABS or PP?
Both ABS and PP belong to the family of olefin polymers, yet ABS consistently shows superior overall performance. The market price reflects this: ABS commands a premium, typically several thousand yuan more per ton than PP.
The chemical structure of ABS—essentially an alloy of acrylonitrile, styrene, and butadiene—grants it unique advantages. QPP, by contrast, derives from a single polystyrene chain. ABS, therefore, combines PP-strength and tough elastic matrices. The result is a higher impact resistance, modestly improved thermal resistance, and a more aesthetically pleasing surface finish. ABS can substitute PP for any application, but the reverse is less reliable; several complex geometries or tough surface coatings formed in ABS may fail if recast into PP.
In conclusion, the compounds differ in density, yield strength, surface hardness, and thermal stability. The collective gap in performance metrics continues to favour ABS over PP in demanding applications.
