Polyester vs Nylon
Side-by-side comparison of the two dominant synthetic fibers: polyester (PET) vs nylon (polyamide). Nylon wins on abrasion resistance and elasticity; polyester wins on UV stability, cost, and dimensional stability. Application matrix shows where each belongs.
Quick Comparison
| Competitor | Winner Axis | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Polyester | varies | Compare properties and use cases |
| Nylon | varies | Compare properties and use cases |
Decision Summary
Choose polyester when UV resistance, dimensional stability, color retention, and cost efficiency are the priority. Choose nylon when abrasion resistance, elasticity under repeated deformation, and slightly better moisture comfort are the priority. In most volume apparel markets, the choice is made for you by cost — polyester dominates because nylon carries a 30–50% commodity price premium.
Why They Perform Differently
Both are melt-spun synthetic polymers but with different molecular architectures. Polyester's (PET) aromatic ring backbone crystallizes tightly during cooling, yielding high stiffness, excellent UV stability, and very low moisture absorption (0.4% regain [1]). Nylon's (polyamide) aliphatic chain with amide linkages provides more molecular flexibility — greater elastic deformation and recovery — and the amide groups accept more moisture (4% regain for Nylon 6,6 [1]).
These structural differences cascade into the performance trade-offs that determine appropriate end use.
Head-to-Head Comparison
| Property | Polyester | Nylon 6,6 | Advantage |
|---|
|----------|-----------|-----------|----------|
| Moisture regain | 0.4% [1] | 4.0% [1] | Polyester (dries faster); Nylon (more comfortable) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tensile strength | 3.5–5.5 g/den [2] | 4.0–6.5 g/den [2] | Nylon (marginally) |
| Abrasion resistance | High | Very high (~2–3× polyester [2]) | Nylon |
| Elasticity and recovery | Moderate | High (amide chain flexibility) | Nylon |
| UV stability | Good (800–1000 hrs before 30% strength loss) | Poor (significant degradation at 300–500 hrs [3]) | Polyester |
| Dyeability | Disperse dyes; limited mid-tone range | Acid dyes; broad color and depth range | Nylon |
| Commodity cost | Baseline | 30–50% higher | Polyester |
| Recycled supply | rPET widely available | rNylon growing (Aquafil ECONYL from fishing nets) | Polyester |
| Chlorine resistance | Moderate | Poor (amide bonds degrade in pool water) | Polyester |
Application Matrix
| End use | Preferred fiber | Reason |
|---|
|---------|----------------|--------|
| Outdoor shells, tents, awnings | Polyester | UV stability; dimensional stability in wet/dry cycles |
|---|---|---|
| Hosiery and socks | Nylon | Abrasion resistance at heel and toe; elasticity |
| Activewear liners and shorts | Nylon | Higher elasticity; better comfort moisture management |
| Swimwear | Nylon preferred | Elasticity; note: both degrade in chlorinated pools |
| Everyday shirting and casual wear | Polyester | Cost; wash performance; wrinkle resistance |
| High-wear workwear and bags | Nylon (high denier) | Superior abrasion resistance at friction points |
The Recycled Variant Landscape
rPET (recycled polyester from plastic bottles) is now mainstream in performance apparel and reduces energy input by 30–50% vs virgin PET. rNylon (primarily Aquafil's ECONYL from recovered fishing nets and carpet waste) is growing in swimwear and premium activewear. Both address end-of-life plastic without significantly altering the fiber's performance characteristics.
Sources and References
[1] Morton, W.E. & Hearle, J.W.S., Physical Properties of Textile Fibres, 4th ed. Woodhead Publishing. Moisture regain data.
[2] Hatch, K.L., Textile Science, West Publishing. Tensile strength and abrasion data for synthetic fibers.
[3] Wypych, G., Handbook of UV Degradation and Stabilization. UV stability data for polyester and nylon.
[4] Tortora, P.G. & Merkel, R.S., Fairchild's Dictionary of Textiles, 7th ed. Polyester and nylon entries.
Compare top picks
Compare fabrics side-by-side and find the best match for your project
Compare top picks