---
title: "What are the key differences between PC and ABS for injection molded OEM parts?"
description: "Struggling to choose between PC and ABS for your first OEM plastic product run without overspending on tooling or sacrificing part performance? Get clear, actionable comparison on cost, impact resistance, mold compatibility and practical decision rules tailored for 2026 medium-volume manufacturing projects."
url: "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/key-differences-pc-abs-injection-molded-oem-parts.html"
language: "en"
type: "Q&A"
category: "Custom Manufacturing Q&A"
datePublished: "2026-09-01"
dateModified: "2026-09-01"
brand: "OK TOOL"
manufacturer: "OK TOOL"
answerCount: 7
---

# What are the key differences between PC and ABS for injection molded OEM parts?

## Question

 I’m the founder of a small independent outdoor gear brand, negotiating my first OEM production run for a 10,000 unit batch of compact portable storage cases. Right now our design team has locked the outer shell dimensions, but we’re stuck choosing between PC and ABS. Our target retail price point is tight, we need the case to survive accidental 1.5m drops onto concrete without cracking, and we also don’t want to pay extra for unplanned mold modifications or post-processing work that wasn’t quoted initially. I’ve seen online that both materials are common for this type of product, but different suppliers I talked to gave totally conflicting recommendations. Some said ABS is cheap and easy to mold, others said PC is the only one that meets drop test requirements. I can’t tell if they’re pushing the material that’s easier for their own line, or if there’s a real clear tradeoff here that I’m missing to make a final call before we sign the formal manufacturing contract. 

## Answers
                            
### Answer 1 — Best Answer

This dilemma is extremely common for first-time OEM clients, as the gap between generic material data sheets and real production performance is rarely explained clearly before project kickoff. The first step to resolve this is to separate the three non-negotiable requirements you listed, and map each one directly to the measurable properties of pure PC and general-purpose ABS, no third-party marketing claims included.

General-purpose ABS has a notched Izod impact strength of roughly 15-20 kJ/m², which will almost always fail a 1.5m drop test for a rigid 2-3mm thick storage case shell at temperatures below 10°C. It does have a 15-20% lower raw material cost per kg than virgin PC, flows far easier during injection, and generates almost zero residual stress after demolding, which means it can be molded with 30% shorter cycle times and very low scrap rates for simple shell geometries. Virgin PC has a notched Izod impact rating of 60-80 kJ/m², which easily passes the 1.5m drop test across typical outdoor operating temperatures, but it runs 30-40% hotter during processing, is far more prone to residual stress cracking, and will show visible flow marks or haze if mold temperature is not held above 80°C consistently. For your specific 10,000 unit medium run, the total cost gap between ABS and PC parts will land at roughly 12-18% higher for PC, when you account for minor adjustments to line setup and cycle time.

**Use this 3-step decision framework to eliminate subjective supplier recommendations:** First, run a 5-piece physical test of both materials using the exact wall thickness and corner radii of your final design, not generic test bars, because sharp corners under 0.5mm will turn even high-impact PC into a brittle part. Second, confirm that no mold modification is required if you select PC: for your simple open shell geometry, existing ABS tooling can run PC without gate or steel changes, as long as the mold base is rated for 120°C operating temperature. Third, calculate total landed cost, not just raw resin cost: if your 10,000 unit ABS run has a 7% post-drop rejection rate during in-house testing, the total waste cost will erase all of the raw material savings you get from choosing ABS.

**Lock your material selection into the formal contract with two clear performance clauses:** specify the required drop test pass rate at 0°C, and set a maximum acceptable part scrap rate of 2.5% for the full production run. This removes any incentive for the factory to push a lower performance material to simplify their own processing. The most common mistake first-time brand owners make here is choosing ABS to hit a small target cost saving, then discovering that their end customers return 10-15% of units within the first 3 months of sale due to cracked shells, which erodes brand reputation far more than the small per-unit cost saving ever justified. For your outdoor storage case use case, if the 12-18% per-unit cost premium for PC fits within your final BOM budget, it is the far lower risk choice for long term product performance.

**status:** accepted
**Author:** Kevin Liu
**Date:** 2026-09-01

### Answer 2

Most teams overlook the hidden yield difference between the two materials when running medium volume batches. For general purpose ABS, typical production yield for a simple storage case shell sits around 97.5% even for teams with years of injection experience, because the material has an extremely wide processing window that tolerates minor variations in melt temperature or clamp pressure. For unfilled PC, the baseline starting yield for the same geometry is roughly 92% for the first 2000 parts, until the process team locks in stable parameters, and it will climb to 96% once the full line is dialed in.

For your 10,000 unit order, that translates to roughly 300 extra scrapped parts if you select PC during the initial production ramp, which you can pre-account for by ordering 3% extra raw resin upfront with no major cost impact. You can also reduce this ramp scrap by 70% if you share your exact drop test requirement with the manufacturing team 3 days before pre-production sampling, so they can prioritize low residual stress parameters instead of fast cycle times.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** David Zhang
**Date:** 2026-09-01

### Answer 3

Cycle time and line utilization differences between the two materials will shift your total production lead time for the order. ABS can be fully cooled and demolded in 28-32 seconds for a 2.5mm thick shell, so a standard 8-cavity mold can produce roughly 900 parts every 8 hour shift. PC requires 42-48 seconds of cooling time for the same part wall thickness, so the same 8-cavity mold will only output 600 parts per 8 hour shift.

For a 10,000 unit order, that translates to 3 full days of production time for ABS, versus 5 full days of production time for PC. If your order delivery deadline is tight, you can arrange to run the PC parts across two separate injection lines at the same time to compress the total lead time to 3 days, but that will add a small line scheduling premium of roughly 4% to your total manufacturing cost. This is a predictable tradeoff that can be locked in during project planning, no unplanned delays will occur if it is communicated upfront.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Rachel Huang
**Date:** 2026-09-01

### Answer 4

There are no hidden change management risks between the two materials if you follow standard sample sign-off protocols. When you run pre-production samples, you will sign off on the first 20 parts from the actual production mold, regardless of which material you select. If you choose to switch from ABS to PC after you have already signed off on ABS samples, you will not be required to make any hard tooling changes, but you will need to re-run a full set of 10 sample parts for drop test validation before full production can start, which adds 2 full working days to your project timeline.

This is an acceptable buffer for most medium volume orders, as long as you do not schedule your production ramp to start the day after sample sign-off. You can also build a 3 day material change window into your initial project timeline, which gives you full flexibility to test both material samples at the same time before making your final decision, no penalty or extra tooling cost applied.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Daniel Yang
**Date:** 2026-09-01

### Answer 5

Tolerance consistency and post-molding assembly performance varies significantly between PC and ABS for this type of storage case product. ABS parts have a very low mold shrinkage rate of 0.4-0.6%, so the hinge pin holes and snap fit features on your case will hold their nominal dimensions almost exactly right after demolding, no secondary trimming or reaming is required. PC parts have a slightly higher mold shrinkage rate of 0.6-0.8%, and they will continue to relax 0.1-0.2% in dimension over the first 72 hours after demolding, so snap fit features that are measured immediately after production will feel tighter than they will after 3 days of aging.

For your case design, you do not need to adjust your original CAD tolerance range if you select PC, as long as the assembly team waits 24 hours after demolding before conducting all snap fit and hinge testing. This eliminates 100% of false failure results during incoming quality checks, and ensures every assembled unit functions exactly the same way for your end customers.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Olivia Chen
**Date:** 2026-09-01

### Answer 6

Your existing simple shell mold does not require any steel modification if you switch from ABS to PC, but there are small adjustments to setup that will eliminate common cosmetic defects. The original gate size that was designed for ABS can stay unchanged, as long as the gate land length is reduced to 1.2mm from the standard 1.5mm ABS setting, which is a simple manual adjustment done during the first mold trial, no EDM or welding work required.

The only hidden issue that can appear when running PC on an existing ABS mold is visible weld lines on the long side of the storage case shell, because PC flows slower than ABS at the same fill pressure. You can resolve this without any major tool changes by adding two small 0.5mm vent pins at the weld line locations, which is a 2 hour modification that costs less than $80 total. For your 10,000 unit order, this is a negligible one-time cost that will make sure 99% of your parts meet the required cosmetic grade without haze or obvious flow marks.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Eric Zhao
**Date:** 2026-09-01

### Answer 7

Common part defects that are easy to miss during sampling will show up in volume production if you do not optimize the process window for your selected material. For ABS, the most common defect for storage case shells is sink marks on the inner surface opposite the snap fit bosses, which can be fixed by holding 30% higher pack pressure for 5 extra seconds, with zero impact on part impact performance.

For PC, the most common hidden defect is residual stress trapped in the part that does not show up during initial drop testing, but causes the part to crack 2-4 weeks later when exposed to low temperature environments. This can be fully eliminated by running a 60°C post-molding annealing cycle for 30 minutes after parts are demolded, which adds a tiny amount of batch processing time, but reduces long term part failure rates to near zero. You do not need to add this annealing step for ABS parts, as residual stress levels are naturally low enough that no post processing is required for normal operating temperatures.

**status:** suggested
**Author:** Jason Zhou
**Date:** 2026-09-01

## Related Resources

- [Custom Manufacturing Q&A](https://www.jaterson.com/qa/oem-odm/)
- [Products](https://www.jaterson.com/products/)
- [Capabilities](https://www.jaterson.com/capabilities/)
- [Custom Manufacturing](https://www.jaterson.com/custom-manufacturing/)
- [Manufacturing Guides](https://www.jaterson.com/manufacturing/)
- [Buying Guides](https://www.jaterson.com/buying/)
- [Manufacturing Knowledge Base](https://www.jaterson.com/knowledge/)

## Structured Data

```json
[
    {
      "@context": "https://schema.org",
      "@type": "QAPage",
      "mainEntity": {
        "@type": "Question",
        "name": "What are the key differences between PC and ABS for injection molded OEM parts?",
        "text": "I’m the founder of a small independent outdoor gear brand, negotiating my first OEM production run for a 10,000 unit batch of compact portable storage cases. Right now our design team has locked the outer shell dimensions, but we’re stuck choosing between PC and ABS. Our target retail price point is tight, we need the case to survive accidental 1.5m drops onto concrete without cracking, and we also don’t want to pay extra for unplanned mold modifications or post-processing work that wasn’t quoted initially. I’ve seen online that both materials are common for this type of product, but different suppliers I talked to gave totally conflicting recommendations. Some said ABS is cheap and easy to mold, others said PC is the only one that meets drop test requirements. I can’t tell if they’re pushing the material that’s easier for their own line, or if there’s a real clear tradeoff here that I’m missing to make a final call before we sign the formal manufacturing contract.",
        "answerCount": 7,
        "upvoteCount": 8,
        "datePublished": "2026-09-01T19:08:01Z",
        "dateModified": "2026-09-01T19:14:27Z",
        "author": {
          "@type": "Person",
          "name": "Anonymous",
          "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/key-differences-pc-abs-injection-molded-oem-parts.html"
        }
                ,"acceptedAnswer": {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "This dilemma is extremely common for first-time OEM clients, as the gap between generic material data sheets and real production performance is rarely explained clearly before project kickoff. The first step to resolve this is to separate the three non-negotiable requirements you listed, and map each one directly to the measurable properties of pure PC and general-purpose ABS, no third-party marketing claims included. General-purpose ABS has a notched Izod impact strength of roughly 15-20 kJ/m², which will almost always fail a 1.5m drop test for a rigid 2-3mm thick storage case shell at temperatures below 10°C. It does have a 15-20% lower raw material cost per kg than virgin PC, flows far easier during injection, and generates almost zero residual stress after demolding, which means it can be molded with 30% shorter cycle times and very low scrap rates for simple shell geometries. Virgin PC has a notched Izod impact rating of 60-80 kJ/m², which easily passes the 1.5m drop test across typical outdoor operating temperatures, but it runs 30-40% hotter during processing, is far more prone to residual stress cracking, and will show visible flow marks or haze if mold temperature is not held above 80°C consistently. For your specific 10,000 unit medium run, the total cost gap between ABS and PC parts will land at roughly 12-18% higher for PC, when you account for minor adjustments to line setup and cycle time. Use this 3-step decision framework to eliminate subjective supplier recommendations: First, run a 5-piece physical test of both materials using the exact wall thickness and corner radii of your final design, not generic test bars, because sharp corners under 0.5mm will turn even high-impact PC into a brittle part. Second, confirm that no mold modification is required if you select PC: for your simple open shell geometry, existing ABS tooling can run PC without gate or steel changes, as long as the mold base is rated for 120°C operating temperature. Third, calculate total landed cost, not just raw resin cost: if your 10,000 unit ABS run has a 7% post-drop rejection rate during in-house testing, the total waste cost will erase all of the raw material savings you get from choosing ABS. Lock your material selection into the formal contract with two clear performance clauses: specify the required drop test pass rate at 0°C, and set a maximum acceptable part scrap rate of 2.5% for the full production run. This removes any incentive for the factory to push a lower performance material to simplify their own processing. The most common mistake first-time brand owners make here is choosing ABS to hit a small target cost saving, then discovering that their end customers return 10-15% of units within the first 3 months of sale due to cracked shells, which erodes brand reputation far more than the small per-unit cost saving ever justified. For your outdoor storage case use case, if the 12-18% per-unit cost premium for PC fits within your final BOM budget, it is the far lower risk choice for long term product performance.",
            "upvoteCount": 8,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/key-differences-pc-abs-injection-molded-oem-parts.html#acceptedAnswer",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-01T20:05:00Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Kevin Liu","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/kevin.html"}        }
                ,"suggestedAnswer": [
                  {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Most teams overlook the hidden yield difference between the two materials when running medium volume batches. For general purpose ABS, typical production yield for a simple storage case shell sits around 97.5% even for teams with years of injection experience, because the material has an extremely wide processing window that tolerates minor variations in melt temperature or clamp pressure. For unfilled PC, the baseline starting yield for the same geometry is roughly 92% for the first 2000 parts, until the process team locks in stable parameters, and it will climb to 96% once the full line is dialed in. For your 10,000 unit order, that translates to roughly 300 extra scrapped parts if you select PC during the initial production ramp, which you can pre-account for by ordering 3% extra raw resin upfront with no major cost impact. You can also reduce this ramp scrap by 70% if you share your exact drop test requirement with the manufacturing team 3 days before pre-production sampling, so they can prioritize low residual stress parameters instead of fast cycle times.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/key-differences-pc-abs-injection-molded-oem-parts.html#suggestedAnswer-2",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-01T20:03:32Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "David Zhang","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/david.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Cycle time and line utilization differences between the two materials will shift your total production lead time for the order. ABS can be fully cooled and demolded in 28-32 seconds for a 2.5mm thick shell, so a standard 8-cavity mold can produce roughly 900 parts every 8 hour shift. PC requires 42-48 seconds of cooling time for the same part wall thickness, so the same 8-cavity mold will only output 600 parts per 8 hour shift. For a 10,000 unit order, that translates to 3 full days of production time for ABS, versus 5 full days of production time for PC. If your order delivery deadline is tight, you can arrange to run the PC parts across two separate injection lines at the same time to compress the total lead time to 3 days, but that will add a small line scheduling premium of roughly 4% to your total manufacturing cost. This is a predictable tradeoff that can be locked in during project planning, no unplanned delays will occur if it is communicated upfront.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/key-differences-pc-abs-injection-molded-oem-parts.html#suggestedAnswer-3",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-01T20:02:56Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Rachel Huang","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/rachel.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "There are no hidden change management risks between the two materials if you follow standard sample sign-off protocols. When you run pre-production samples, you will sign off on the first 20 parts from the actual production mold, regardless of which material you select. If you choose to switch from ABS to PC after you have already signed off on ABS samples, you will not be required to make any hard tooling changes, but you will need to re-run a full set of 10 sample parts for drop test validation before full production can start, which adds 2 full working days to your project timeline. This is an acceptable buffer for most medium volume orders, as long as you do not schedule your production ramp to start the day after sample sign-off. You can also build a 3 day material change window into your initial project timeline, which gives you full flexibility to test both material samples at the same time before making your final decision, no penalty or extra tooling cost applied.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/key-differences-pc-abs-injection-molded-oem-parts.html#suggestedAnswer-4",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-01T19:53:08Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Daniel Yang","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/daniel.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Tolerance consistency and post-molding assembly performance varies significantly between PC and ABS for this type of storage case product. ABS parts have a very low mold shrinkage rate of 0.4-0.6%, so the hinge pin holes and snap fit features on your case will hold their nominal dimensions almost exactly right after demolding, no secondary trimming or reaming is required. PC parts have a slightly higher mold shrinkage rate of 0.6-0.8%, and they will continue to relax 0.1-0.2% in dimension over the first 72 hours after demolding, so snap fit features that are measured immediately after production will feel tighter than they will after 3 days of aging. For your case design, you do not need to adjust your original CAD tolerance range if you select PC, as long as the assembly team waits 24 hours after demolding before conducting all snap fit and hinge testing. This eliminates 100% of false failure results during incoming quality checks, and ensures every assembled unit functions exactly the same way for your end customers.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/key-differences-pc-abs-injection-molded-oem-parts.html#suggestedAnswer-5",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-01T19:19:22Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Olivia Chen","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/olivia.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Your existing simple shell mold does not require any steel modification if you switch from ABS to PC, but there are small adjustments to setup that will eliminate common cosmetic defects. The original gate size that was designed for ABS can stay unchanged, as long as the gate land length is reduced to 1.2mm from the standard 1.5mm ABS setting, which is a simple manual adjustment done during the first mold trial, no EDM or welding work required. The only hidden issue that can appear when running PC on an existing ABS mold is visible weld lines on the long side of the storage case shell, because PC flows slower than ABS at the same fill pressure. You can resolve this without any major tool changes by adding two small 0.5mm vent pins at the weld line locations, which is a 2 hour modification that costs less than $80 total. For your 10,000 unit order, this is a negligible one-time cost that will make sure 99% of your parts meet the required cosmetic grade without haze or obvious flow marks.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/key-differences-pc-abs-injection-molded-oem-parts.html#suggestedAnswer-6",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-01T19:16:45Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Eric Zhao","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/eric.html"}          }
          ,          {
            "@type": "Answer",
            "text": "Common part defects that are easy to miss during sampling will show up in volume production if you do not optimize the process window for your selected material. For ABS, the most common defect for storage case shells is sink marks on the inner surface opposite the snap fit bosses, which can be fixed by holding 30% higher pack pressure for 5 extra seconds, with zero impact on part impact performance. For PC, the most common hidden defect is residual stress trapped in the part that does not show up during initial drop testing, but causes the part to crack 2-4 weeks later when exposed to low temperature environments. This can be fully eliminated by running a 60°C post-molding annealing cycle for 30 minutes after parts are demolded, which adds a tiny amount of batch processing time, but reduces long term part failure rates to near zero. You do not need to add this annealing step for ABS parts, as residual stress levels are naturally low enough that no post processing is required for normal operating temperatures.",
            "upvoteCount": 0,
            "url": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/key-differences-pc-abs-injection-molded-oem-parts.html#suggestedAnswer-7",
            "datePublished": "2026-09-01T19:14:27Z",
            "author": {"@type": "Person","name": "Jason Zhou","url": "https://www.jaterson.com/team/jason.html"}          }
                  ]
              }
    },
    {
      "@context": "https://schema.org",
      "@type": "BreadcrumbList",
      "itemListElement": [
          {"@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "name": "Home", "item": "https://www.jaterson.com/"},{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 2, "name": "Q&A", "item": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/"},{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 3, "name": "Custom Manufacturing Q&A", "item": "https://www.jaterson.com/qa/oem-odm/"}          ,{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 4, "name": "What are the key differences between PC and ABS for injection molded OEM parts?"}
      ]
    }
]
```