Minimal Match — 37.9% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
JIS G4053 SNCM220 (JIS G4053:2008) and IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 (IS 4367:1991) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Alloy Steel category.
JIS G4053 SNCM220 is defined under Japanese Industrial Standards (JIS), originating from Japan, while IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 is defined under Bureau of Indian Standards (IS), originating from India.
As per chemical composition, JIS G4053 SNCM220 vs IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 is a 56.9% match.
As per mechanical properties, the match is 0%.
Combined, this makes them a minimal match overall at 37.9%.
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
JIS G4053 SNCM220
IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10
Tensile Strength
930 MPa min
410-590 MPa
Yield Strength
785 MPa min
245 MPa min
Elongation
12% min
>=18%
Hardness
269-331 HB
Not specified
Izod Impact
Not specified
55 J min
Hardness (soft annealed)
Not specified
<=187 HB
Condition
Not specified
Normalised and tempered, ruling section up to 50 mm
Typical Applications
JIS G4053 SNCM220
Nickel-chromium-molybdenum case-hardening (carburizing) steel; automotive bearings, drive shafts, gears, and components requiring high wear resistance with impact-resistant core
IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10
Not documented
Can JIS G4053 SNCM220 Be Substituted With IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10?
JIS G4053 SNCM220 and IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 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 G4053 SNCM220 and IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10?
Both grades share a similar composition profile; see the specification table above for the exact chemistry and mechanical property values.
Can JIS G4053 SNCM220 be substituted with IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10?
JIS G4053 SNCM220 and IS 4367 10Cr9Mo10 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.