top of page

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Our clients often ask questions such as:
 

  • Which casting method should I use for my project?

  • Which casting method is the best for quality?

  • Which casting technique is the cheapest?

  • Which casting method should I use if I only need a few parts?

​

We have created a comprehensive FAQ and comparison table to help answer some these above questions.

Download Casting Method Comparison (PDF)

Sand Casting

Pressure Die Casting

Investment Casting

Materials Cast

  • Almost any metal can be cast

  • Only metals with a low melting point can be cast.

  • Almost any metal can be cast

Size/Weight/Shape Capabilities

  • Huge range in size of castings from tiny to very large.

  • Fairly complex shapes can be cast.

  • Fairly intricate internal shapes can be produced.

  • Not feasible to cast thin material section.

  • Complex shapes can be cast.

  • Thin walls possible to achieve.

  • Casting size is limited by casting machine capacity.

  • Part geometry must allow for removal from die cavity.

  • High reliability and consistency.

  • Complex, intricate shapes and thin walls possible.

  • High dimensional accuracy.

  • No draft requirements on casting geometry.

  • Weights greater than approximately 50kg may become uneconomical.

Mechanical Properties

  • Fair to good

  • Generally better than sand casting

  • Fair

Surface Finish

  • Inferior surface finish (‘grainy’) and dimensional accuracy in comparison to other casting techniques.

  • Surface defects possible.

  • Usually requires further machining.

  • Very good surface finish. Smooth or textured finishes can be achieved.

  • High dimensional accuracy.

  • Minimal or no further machining required.

  • Excellent surface finish.

  • Often requires no further  machining.

Production Rate

  • High speed, low volume

  • High speed, high volume

  • Relatively slow

Cost

  • Low capital investment (low tooling cost).

  • Relatively low cost for one-off or small-scale production compared with other casting methods.  Not economical for large scale production.

  • Relatively easy and cheap to modify pattern.

  • Sand can be recycled.

  • Further machining costs may be incurred.

  • High capital investment required

  • (die-casting machine and tooling expensive).

  • Economical for high scale production. Not feasible for one-off or small scale production.

  • May reduce requirement for further machining

  • Expensive tooling and labour costs.

  • May be uneconomical for large weight castings.

  • Potential to create savings for larger/repeat volume production.

  • Surface finish capabilities may negate requirement for further machining which is the main cost-saving feature of this casting technique.

  • Wax can be re-used.

Typical Applications

  • Engine blocks, crank shafts, cylinder heads, equipment housing, propeller blades, gears.

  • Automotive parts, machine components, tooling, fittings and connectors, telecommunication components, sink faucets, pots and pans.

  • Aerospace parts, automotive parts, military equipment, high precision equipment and tooling, gears, golf clubs, metal furniture.

bottom of page