×
EVA stands for ethylene-vinyl acetate, which comes from combining ethylene and vinyl acetate molecules. The material usually has around 10 to 40 percent vinyl acetate mixed in, making it much more flexible than other plastics. When manufacturers want to create EVA products, they typically use high temperature injection molding techniques that result in lightweight foam materials with pretty consistent cell structures throughout. On the other hand, polyurethane or PU forms when diisocyanates react with polyols during production. Depending on how these components are combined, the end product can range from very stiff to quite soft and pliable. Most PU manufacturing happens through either pour-in-place methods or compression molding processes, giving producers good control over how dense and uniform their final product will be. Because of these different manufacturing approaches, EVA tends to have that characteristic rubbery feel while PU offers something more like sponge-like properties that adapt well to pressure changes.
| Property | EVA Soles | PU Soles |
|---|---|---|
| Density | 0.12–0.25 g/cm³ | 0.25–0.45 g/cm³ |
| Compression Set | 15–20% (excellent recovery) | 25–35% (gradual deformation) |
| Material Memory | Retains 92% shape after 1,000 cycles | Retains 78% shape after 1,000 cycles |
EVA’s lower density contributes to lighter footwear, while PU’s higher density improves load distribution. During compression testing, EVA rebounds 15% faster than PU, making it well-suited for running shoes. PU’s slower recovery provides progressive cushioning, ideal for work boots and prolonged standing applications.
EVA has decent protection against UV rays but still loses around 30% of its tensile strength after spending about 500 hours in direct sunlight. PU materials hold up much better when exposed to UV stress, with only about 12% degradation thanks to their cross linked polymer makeup. When used outside, EVA soles tend to show surface cracks somewhere between 18 to 24 months later on, while PU soles keep their structure intact for well over three years. That said, PU does have one weakness though it breaks down faster in damp conditions compared to EVA which actually resists taking in moisture pretty well. All these properties influence what materials get chosen for different applications. Most hiking boots go with PU because they need something tough enough to last through rough terrain. On the flip side, EVA remains popular for shoes worn in wet environments since it stays lightweight and doesn't soak up water like other materials do.
EVA foam works by absorbing impact thanks to its open cell structure that squishes when something hits it, spreading out the energy sideways across the midsole area. According to some recent studies from last year, this setup cuts down on those sharp impact peaks by around 18 to 22 percent compared with regular old solid rubber. On the other hand, PU material takes a different approach. It has these really tight polymer links that let it push energy straight down instead, which apparently gives about 12 to 15 percent better protection against big impacts over 8 kilonewtons. Most folks find EVA fine for everyday stuff like walking around town, but if someone gets into serious sports where they need sudden bursts of power, like playing basketball or pounding trails, then PU tends to hold up much better because of how rigid those molecules stay under stress.
Polyurethane (PU) manages to return around 85 to 88 percent of the energy put into it because of how its polymer structure works, beating EVA foam which only gives back about 70 to 75 percent of what gets absorbed. When tested with elite sprinters in controlled conditions, shoes made with PU actually cut down 100 meter race times by somewhere between 0.08 and 0.12 seconds over similar shoes using EVA. According to findings from the 2023 Sports Materials Performance Report, PU can capture elastic energy when feet hit the ground and then let most of that energy go again just 0.03 seconds later during toe off. This makes PU especially good for sports where quick bursts of power matter a lot, think long jumping or playing tennis where athletes need to propel themselves rapidly.
| Material | 500-Cycle Compression Set (ASTM D395) | Hardness Retention |
|---|---|---|
| EVA | 8–12% | 82% |
| PU | 2–4% | 95% |
PU’s cross-linked structure resists permanent deformation four times better than EVA in extended wear simulations. After 200 hours of dynamic load testing (120kg @ 3Hz), EVA midsoles lose 15% of their cushioning capacity, while PU retains 93% of its original shock absorption performance.
Researchers ran a 12 week treadmill test on 50 runners and discovered something interesting about shoe materials. The EVA midsoles squished down about 12% after covering 300 miles, which is almost twice as much compression compared to the PU ones at just 6%. But there's another side to this story. Since EVA has a lighter density of 0.15 grams per cubic centimeter versus 0.25 for PU material, shoes made with EVA ended up being 28 grams lighter per pair. This shows why designers face such tough choices when creating running shoes. They want them to feel good and be light on the feet, but they also need these shoes to hold up over time without breaking down too quickly.
When put through the standard ASTM D4060 abrasion test, PU soles actually hold up about 40 percent better than EVA materials. That's why most workers in mines and construction sites where there's lots of sharp stuff around tend to go for PU soles instead. Now EVA does have its advantages too. It resists tearing when something hits it suddenly, with studies showing roughly 15% less chance of cracks spreading through the material. But here's the catch: because EVA isn't as dense, it just doesn't last as long on those rough factory floors where friction is constant. The tradeoff between impact protection and durability becomes pretty clear after some real world testing.
Tests that speed up the aging process show PU soles keep about 85% of their original thickness after spending 1,500 hours under simulated industrial conditions, whereas EVA manages only around 62%. When it comes to cold weather performance though, EVA has the edge. Even at temperatures as low as minus ten degrees Celsius, it stays flexible enough to maintain roughly 90% of its usual pliability. PU gets noticeably stiffer in these conditions, becoming about 65% harder to bend. For workers dealing with oily environments, PU stands out because of its chemical resistance properties. Soles made from this material last nearly 2.3 times longer than EVA alternatives when exposed to oils, which explains why many manufacturers still prefer PU for serious protective footwear applications.
After six months of UV exposure:
| Property | PU Degradation | EVA Degradation |
|---|---|---|
| Compression resistance | 12% loss | 28% loss |
| Tensile strength | 8% reduction | 19% reduction |
| Surface cracking | None | Moderate |
PU also absorbs significantly less moisture (0.9%) than EVA (3.2%), reducing the risk of foam collapse in humid environments and enhancing long-term structural stability.
EVA has a density around 0.15 grams per cubic centimeter, which is roughly 40 percent lighter compared to standard PU materials that sit at about 0.35 g/cm³. The lighter weight makes all the difference when someone is on their feet for hours, particularly noticeable during long runs or hikes through rough terrain. Sure, PU does offer extra protection against impacts, which explains why it's still popular in certain safety boots. But look at what the research says too many marathoners who switch to EVA shoes mention feeling significantly less tired in their legs after running 10 kilometers. Around 17% less fatigue according to some studies. That being said, workers in factories or warehouses will tell you differently. They prefer PU because those heavier soles give much better support for the arches when standing all day on concrete floors. Sometimes, comfort isn't just about how light something feels.
EVA stays flexible even when temps drop below freezing, which is why it works so well in winter gear and mountain environments. PU tells a different story though it gets noticeably stiffer around 5 degrees Celsius, making it less ideal for colder weather applications. When we look at how long these materials hold up, PU definitely wins out. Tests show it can handle roughly four times as many bending motions before showing signs of wear, which explains why manufacturers often choose PU for their safety footwear and work boots. Trail runners might appreciate EVA's unique properties too. The material's flexible nature helps push back against impact forces better than PU does, especially when running downhill. Studies indicate this redistribution effect reduces calf fatigue by about 18%, something many outdoor enthusiasts have noticed firsthand after switching from traditional foam options.
The firm compression response of PU material gives extra support during the heel strike, which is really important for people who have to carry heavy loads all day long. When it comes to running shoes, EVA materials bounce back better at the toe off stage, helping runners get that extra push they need forward. Looking at data collected from around 1,200 individuals, we found that PU actually cuts down sideways ankle movement by about 9 degrees when walking on rough ground. That makes a big difference for hikers navigating tricky trails. On the flip side, EVA returns 62 percent more energy compared to other materials, something that works well with how sprinters move their legs. This means runners can conserve about 5.2 ml of oxygen per kg per minute during longer runs according to recent research published last year. Choosing the right sole type based on these properties helps prevent those annoying overpronation issues too, cutting injury rates down by roughly a fifth among workers whose jobs require specific foot protection.
Modern hybrid soles combine the lightness of EVA foam with the toughness of polyurethane. Recent research from footwear engineers back in 2023 showed something interesting about these mixed material midsoles. They found around an 18 percent boost in energy return when walking or running, plus about 27% less squishing over time compared to old fashioned single material soles. Most manufacturers tend to put the soft EVA where feet really need it most during impact, while adding extra PU reinforcement in spots that usually wear out first. This smart combination gives shoes both good cushioning right where needed and lasting support through all those daily steps.
When it comes to recycling potential, EVA has the upper hand with around 43% of material getting reprocessed. Traditional PU materials depend a lot on those petroleum based polyols though. There's been some interesting developments lately with new PU formulas made from castor oil that cut down carbon emissions by nearly a third when compared to standard versions according to Design News from last year. Some companies running closed loop manufacturing tests managed to create EVA shoe soles incorporating about 60% industrial waste without compromising their ability to resist tearing. This kind of innovation points us in the direction of more circular production methods for the industry moving forward.
The latest modified EVA compounds being developed contain silica nanoparticles which boost their resistance to wear and tear by around 40%, making them much better suited for rugged trail running conditions. At the same time, manufacturers working on polyurethane materials have started creating breathable microcellular foams that keep the same kind of flexibility as EVA but still hold up under weight. One recent breakthrough comes from a thermoplastic polyurethane hybrid foam that showed impressive results during testing. After going through 50 thousand compression cycles, it retained 92% of its original shape, outperforming regular PU by nearly 31% according to Modern Materials Report from last year. All these advances are helping solve what used to be a tough choice between EVA and PU properties, allowing shoe designers to make soles that last longer while also providing better support for foot mechanics during intense activity.
EVA stands for ethylene-vinyl acetate, a lightweight and flexible material, while PU stands for polyurethane, known for its durability and density.
EVA has a lower density, making it lighter, whereas PU has a higher density, providing better load distribution.
PU soles offer better UV resistance compared to EVA soles, which can degrade faster in direct sunlight.
Hybrid soles combine the benefits of both EVA and PU, offering enhanced energy return and durability without compromising on comfort.
EVA is more recyclable, while newer PU formulations are reducing carbon emissions using sustainable materials like castor oil.
Hot News2025-03-26
2025-03-24
2025-03-21
QUANZHOU WEFOAM TRADING CO.,LTD has always being specialized in sport products , including sport shoes , Ladies and Man flip Flop , Unisex Slide , yoga mat and various mats.
Room 1101, Feili Center, 72 Daxing Street, Quanzhou, Fujian, China
Copyright © 2025 by QUANZHOU WEFOAM TRADING CO., LTD Privacy Policy
EN
