Minimal Match — 35% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
JIS G4303 SUS316 (JIS G4303:2021) and EN 10088-1 1.4845 (EN 10088-1:2014) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Stainless Steel category.
JIS G4303 SUS316 is typically used for marine applications, chemical processing, pharmaceutical equipment, while EN 10088-1 1.4845 is commonly used for furnace parts, heat exchangers, kiln components.
JIS G4303 SUS316 is defined under Japanese Industrial Standards (JIS), originating from Japan, while EN 10088-1 1.4845 is defined under European Standard (EN), originating from Europe.
As per chemical composition, JIS G4303 SUS316 vs EN 10088-1 1.4845 is a 75% match.
As per mechanical properties, the match is 66.7%.
Combined, this makes them a minimal match overall at 35%.
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
JIS G4303 SUS316
EN 10088-1 1.4845
Tensile Strength
≥520 MPa
≥515 MPa
Yield Strength
≥205 MPa
≥205 MPa
Elongation
≥40%
≥40%
Hardness
≤187 HB
Not specified
Max Service Temp
Not specified
1100°C continuous
Typical Applications
JIS G4303 SUS316
Marine applications, chemical processing, pharmaceutical equipment
EN 10088-1 1.4845
Furnace parts, heat exchangers, kiln components
Key Differences
JIS G4303 SUS316 specifies Mo which is not specified for EN 10088-1 1.4845.
Can JIS G4303 SUS316 Be Substituted With EN 10088-1 1.4845?
JIS G4303 SUS316 and EN 10088-1 1.4845 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 G4303 SUS316 and EN 10088-1 1.4845?
JIS G4303 SUS316 specifies Mo which is not specified for EN 10088-1 1.4845.
Can JIS G4303 SUS316 be substituted with EN 10088-1 1.4845?
JIS G4303 SUS316 and EN 10088-1 1.4845 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.