IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 vs EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12
Related Material — 69.9% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 (IS 1570 (Part 6):1996) and EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12 (EN ISO 4957:2018) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Tool & Die Steels category.
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS), originating from India, while EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12 is defined under European Standard (EN), originating from Europe.
As per chemical composition, IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 vs EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12 is a 79.5% match.
Mechanical property data is not available for both grades, so this factor could not be scored.
Combined, this makes them a related material overall at 69.9%.
Frequently Compared With IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12:
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12
EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12
Hardness HRC (hardened)
Not specified
58–64
Hardness HB (annealed)
Not specified
≤255
Typical Applications
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12
Not documented
EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12
Blanking dies, thread rolling dies, gauges
Key Differences
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 specifies Mo, V, P, S which are not specified for EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12.
Can IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 Be Substituted With EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12?
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 and EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12 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 IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 and EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12?
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 specifies Mo, V, P, S which are not specified for EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12.
Can IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 be substituted with EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12?
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT160Cr12 and EN ISO 4957 X210Cr12 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.