Rigid cones or flexible PVC: which should you choose?
Impact resistance, service life, total cost of ownership, recyclability: the field comparison between rigid traffic cones and flexible PVC cones.
Two main families of cones share the temporary road signing market: rigid plastic cones (polyethylene or polypropylene) and flexible PVC cones. At first glance they do the same job. On site, after a few months of intensive use, the difference is stark. Here is our comparison, so you can choose with full knowledge of the facts.
Rigid cones: the apparent saving
Polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP) cones are the cheapest to buy — that is their main argument, and it is a fair one for occasional, static use.
Their limit is mechanical: a rigid plastic does not deform, it breaks. On a road worksite, where cones get hit, run over by truck wheels, thrown from vans and stored in bulk, that translates into:
- cones cracked or shattered by the first serious impacts, especially in cold weather when the plastic turns brittle;
- fragments on the carriageway, which are themselves a hazard for road users;
- detached bases on two-part models;
- a high replacement rate, rarely counted in the purchase price.
Flexible PVC cones: take the hit and stand back up
Flexible PVC behaves radically differently: it absorbs the impact and springs back into shape. A REVO cone run over by a heavy truck stands back up; that is the very principle our range was designed around.
The advantages seen in the field:
- Resistance to repeated impacts, including at low temperatures — a point tested by the EN 13422 standard (cold impact and drop tests);
- A service life 3 to 5 times longer than a rigid cone in intensive use, according to our customers’ feedback;
- One-piece injection moulding: no separate base to come loose;
- Stability: PVC is naturally denser and the ballasted base keeps the cone in place as vehicles pass;
- Recyclability: in France, the majority of cones are made of PVC, which makes it possible both to use recycled material to manufacture them and to feed them back into the recycling stream at end of life.
All without compromising visibility: fluorescent orange pigmented through the material and a class R2 high-intensity retroreflective sleeve (Orafol 5934 prismatic film on our ranges).
The real criterion: total cost of ownership
The right calculation is not the unit price but the cost per year of use:
| Criterion | Rigid cone | Flexible PVC cone |
|---|---|---|
| Purchase price | Low | Higher |
| Behaviour on impact | Breaks, fragments | Springs back |
| Service life in intensive use | Short | 3 to 5 times longer |
| Replacement cost | Recurring | Marginal |
| End of life | Often not recovered | PVC recycling stream |
Over five years of intensive use, our customers put the overall saving at 40% to 60% after switching to flexible PVC — not counting the management time and waste avoided.
In short
- Occasional, static use on a tight budget: a rigid cone can do the job.
- Road worksites, intensive use, exposure to impacts: flexible PVC wins, on total cost as well as on safety.
At EHS we manufacture more than 200,000 flexible PVC cones a year, compliant with EN 13422, in 500, 750 and 1000 mm. Browse our data sheets or request a quote.
Sources
A question about our products?
Our team is here to advise you.