Table of Contents
Reviewed and updated by ICD - Week 30/2026
Summary: PP plastic has better heat resistance; PET is more transparent and flexible. PP is more widely used in industry. For plastic pallets specifically, PP is the most common material after HDPE.
PET (Polyethylene Terephthalate) and PP (Polypropylene) are both important materials in manufacturing and consumer products. Both have distinct advantages, but they are not interchangeable. Understanding the differences helps you select the right plastic for your application.
What is PET plastic?
PET (Polyethylene Terephthalate) is a thermoplastic polyester widely used in food packaging and industrial applications. Key characteristics: high optical clarity, light weight, strong, food safe, and highly recyclable (resin code 1). PET operating temperature typically ranges from -70 degrees C to 120 degrees C (amorphous), making it suitable for cold storage and ambient temperature applications.
What is PP plastic?
PP (Polypropylene) is a thermoplastic with superior mechanical properties and higher heat resistance than PET. Light, excellent load resistance, and outstanding chemical resistance make it widely used from packaging to medical devices. PP withstands up to 160 degrees C (melting point), suited for high-temperature applications such as microwave food containers and autoclave sterilization. PP typically has lower optical clarity than PET, but this does not affect its functional performance.
PET vs PP: head-to-head comparison
| Criteria | PET | PP |
|---|---|---|
| Optical clarity | High - excellent for display | Lower - typically semi-opaque |
| Heat resistance | Up to ~70-120 degrees C | Up to 160 degrees C (Tm) |
| Impact/flexural strength | Good | Very good - higher toughness |
| Chemical resistance | Moderate | Excellent - acids, alkalis, solvents |
| Recyclability | Widely recycled (code 1) | Good (code 5) - growing infrastructure |
| Primary applications | Beverages, food, textiles | Industry, medical, automotive, pallets |
| Food safe | Yes (code 1) | Yes (code 5) |
| Density | 1.38-1.40 g/cm3 | 0.90-0.91 g/cm3 (lighter) |
PET applications
- Food and beverage packaging: Water bottles, food containers, clear blister packs
- Textiles: PET processed into polyester fibre for clothing and industrial fabrics
- Cosmetics and pharma packaging: Clear bottles and containers
- Household items: Kitchen utensils, safe toys
PP applications
- Food containers: Microwave-safe boxes, food-grade tubs
- Medical: Syringes, surgical instrument trays, medicine packaging
- Automotive: Dashboards, bumper covers, under-hood components
- Consumer goods: Bins, furniture, strapping
- Industrial: Plastic pallets, crates, stretch wrap film
Which is better?
Neither material is universally better - the choice depends on application requirements:
- Choose PET when you need maximum optical clarity, food/beverage packaging requiring high transparency, or applications in the -70 to 70 degrees C range.
- Choose PP when heat resistance above 100 degrees C is required, chemical resistance is critical, repeated mechanical loading is involved (pallets, crates), or weight savings matter (PP density 0.90 vs PET 1.38 g/cm3).
For plastic pallets, PP is the preferred choice after HDPE due to its heat resistance, chemical resistance, and cost-effectiveness at industrial scale.
Thermal behavior differs by resin - see our HDPE plastic melting point analysis for reference figures.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Is PET or PP better for hot food containers?
PP. Its melting point of 160 degrees C makes it suitable for microwave use and hot-fill applications. PET softens at lower temperatures and is not recommended for microwave heating.
2. Which is more recyclable - PET or PP?
PET (code 1) currently has a more established recycling infrastructure globally. PP (code 5) is also recyclable and infrastructure is growing. Both are better than PVC or PS for recyclability.
3. Can PP replace PET for water bottles?
Technically yes - PP is food safe and has good moisture barrier properties. However, PET is preferred for water bottles due to superior optical clarity and established high-volume production infrastructure.
Contact ICD Vietnam - PP and HDPE plastic pallets
Hotline 24/7: 0983 797 186 | 090 345 9186 | 090 5859 186
Zalo: icdvietnam | Email: sales@icdvietnam.com.vn
References
- Wikipedia: Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET)
- Wikipedia: Polypropylene (PP)
PET vs PP by end-use: bottles, film and boxes
Choosing between PET and PP is easier when you map each property to a real end-use. The two resins behave very differently across melting point, clarity, chemical resistance and recyclability, which is why one rarely substitutes for the other on a production line. The table below breaks the comparison down by the applications buyers ask about most - bottles, films and rigid boxes - using the same technical figures referenced earlier in this article.
| Property / end-use | PET | PP |
|---|---|---|
| Melting / max temperature | Up to 120 degrees C | Up to 160 degrees C |
| Optical clarity | High - see-through | Lower - semi-opaque |
| Chemical resistance | Moderate | Excellent - acids, alkalis, solvents |
| Bottles | Preferred - water, beverages | Possible but less clear |
| Film | Clear blister packs | Stretch and shrink film |
| Rigid boxes / containers | Cold and ambient packaging | Microwave-safe boxes, crates |
| Recyclability | Resin code 1 - widely recycled | Resin code 5 - growing |
| Food safety | Yes (code 1) | Yes (code 5) |
The pattern is consistent: PET wins where clarity and beverage-grade recyclability matter, while PP wins where heat above 100 degrees C, chemical contact or repeated mechanical loading are involved. PP is also lighter, at a density of 0.90 g/cm3 against PET’s 1.38 g/cm3, which lowers shipping weight on high-volume packaging. For industrial reuse such as crates and plastic pallets, PP and HDPE remain the standard choices because PET softens too early under load and heat.
Need help matching PET or PP to your packaging or pallet application? Contact ICD Vietnam at 0983 797 186 for free material advice.
