Minimal Match — 51.8% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
JIS G3506 S80C (JIS G3506:2004) and BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10 (BS 970 (Part 1):1991) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Carbon Steel category.
JIS G3506 S80C is typically used for springs, high carbon wire, hand tools, while BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10 is commonly used for case hardening steel (section four).
JIS G3506 S80C is defined under Japanese Industrial Standards (JIS), originating from Japan, while BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10 is defined under British Standards (BS), originating from United Kingdom.
As per chemical composition, JIS G3506 S80C vs BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10 is a 77.7% match.
As per mechanical properties, the match is 0%.
Combined, this makes them a minimal match overall at 51.8%.
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
JIS G3506 S80C
BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10
Tensile Strength
≥820 MPa (annealed)
430 MPa min
Hardness HRC
60–65 (hardened)
Not specified
Condition
Not specified
Case hardened, 19 mm test bar
Elongation
Not specified
18 % min
Typical Applications
JIS G3506 S80C
Springs, high carbon wire, hand tools
BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10
Case hardening steel (section four)
Key Differences
JIS G3506 S80C specifies Si, P, S which are not specified for BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10.
Can JIS G3506 S80C Be Substituted With BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10?
JIS G3506 S80C and BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10 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 JIS G3506 S80C and BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10?
JIS G3506 S80C specifies Si, P, S which are not specified for BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10.
Can JIS G3506 S80C be substituted with BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10?
JIS G3506 S80C and BS 970 (Part 1) 045M10 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.