IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 vs GOST 5950 3H2W8F
Minimal Match — 35% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 (IS 1570 (Part 6):1996) and GOST 5950 3H2W8F (GOST 5950-2000) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Tool & Die Steels category.
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS) (India).
As per chemical composition, IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 vs GOST 5950 3H2W8F is a 45.4% 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 IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2:
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) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2
GOST 5950 3H2W8F
Tensile Strength
Not specified
1400-1700 MPa
Yield Strength
Not specified
1200 MPa min
Elongation
Not specified
8% min
Hardness
Not specified
45-50 HRC
Typical Applications
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2
Not documented
GOST 5950 3H2W8F
Used for forging dies, extrusion tools, hot punches, mandrels, and die inserts.
Key Differences
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 specifies Mo, Co, Mn, P which are not specified for GOST 5950 3H2W8F.
Can IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 Be Substituted With GOST 5950 3H2W8F?
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 and GOST 5950 3H2W8F 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) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 and GOST 5950 3H2W8F?
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 specifies Mo, Co, Mn, P which are not specified for GOST 5950 3H2W8F.
Can IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 be substituted with GOST 5950 3H2W8F?
IS 1570 (Part 6) XT87W6Mo5Cr4V2 and GOST 5950 3H2W8F 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.