Abstract Thermogravimetry, differential scanning calorimetry and curing studies were used to assess the viability of random and block copolymers comprising 1,4‐phenylene sulphide and 2‐methyl‐1,4‐phenylene sulphide repeat units as alternatives to poly(1,4‐phenylene sulphide) (PPS). The properties of the copolymers are discussed critically and compared with those of the parent homopolymers PPS and poly(2‐methyl‐1,4‐phenylene sulphide) (PMPS). The results suggest that (a) random copolymers with low PMPS contents would offer the best compromise between PPS and PMPS properties, and (b) more desirable physical properties might be achieved from systems containing a less reactive 2‐substituted‐1,4‐phenylene sulphide comonomer repeat unit.
M. Wejchan‐JudekB. Perkowska-Śpiewak