Minimal Match — 35% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 (EN 10088-1:2014) and GOST 5632 12Kh13 (GOST 5632-2014) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Stainless Steel category.
EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 is typically used for marine, chemical, pharmaceutical equipment, while GOST 5632 12Kh13 is commonly used for turbine blades, pump shafts, fasteners, cutlery.
EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 is defined under European Standard (EN) (Europe).
As per chemical composition, EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 vs GOST 5632 12Kh13 is a 51% match.
Mechanical property data is not available for both grades, so this factor could not be scored.
Combined, this makes them a minimal match overall at 35%.
Frequently Compared With EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2:
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2
GOST 5632 12Kh13
Tensile Strength
Not specified
≥540 MPa (annealed)
Hardness HRC
Not specified
36–45 (hardened)
Typical Applications
EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2
Marine, chemical, pharmaceutical equipment
GOST 5632 12Kh13
Turbine blades, pump shafts, fasteners, cutlery
Key Differences
EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 specifies P, S, Mo, N which are not specified for GOST 5632 12Kh13.
Can EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 Be Substituted With GOST 5632 12Kh13?
EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 and GOST 5632 12Kh13 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 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 and GOST 5632 12Kh13?
EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 specifies P, S, Mo, N which are not specified for GOST 5632 12Kh13.
Can EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 be substituted with GOST 5632 12Kh13?
EN 10088-1 X5CrNiMo17-12-2 and GOST 5632 12Kh13 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.