Minimal Match — 47.1% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 (EN 10028-2:2017) and IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6 (IS 4367:1991) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Alloy Steel category.
EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 is defined under European Standard (EN), originating from Europe, while IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6 is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS), originating from India.
As per chemical composition, EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 vs IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6 is a 68.2% match.
As per mechanical properties, the match is 4.9%.
Combined, this makes them a minimal match overall at 47.1%.
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5
IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6
Tensile Strength
510-650 MPa
380-550 MPa
Yield Strength
>=345 MPa
225 MPa min
Elongation
>=20%
>=19%
Condition
Usual delivery condition normalized and tempered (+NT), nominal thickness up to 60 mm; transverse direction, Yield Strength is ReH, Elongation is A
Normalised and tempered, ruling section up to 40 mm
Izod Impact
Not specified
60 J min
Hardness (soft annealed)
Not specified
<=170 HB
Typical Applications
EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5
Flat products for pressure purposes
IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6
Not documented
Key Differences
EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 specifies N, Cu which are not specified for IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6.
Can EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 Be Substituted With IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6?
EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 and IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6 share some compositional similarity but differ enough that substitution should not be assumed. Review the differences above carefully, and consult the applicable standard or a metallurgist before using one in place of the other.
What is the difference between EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 and IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6?
EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 specifies N, Cu which are not specified for IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6.
Can EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 be substituted with IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6?
EN 10028-2 18MnMo4-5 and IS 4367 07Cr4Mo6 share some compositional similarity but differ enough that substitution should not be assumed. Review the differences above carefully, and consult the applicable standard or a metallurgist before using one in place of the other.