Related Material — 69.9% match
based on chemical composition and mechanical property overlap.
SAE J404 9260 (SAE J404:2009) and CSA G40.21 350WT (CSA G40.21-13 (R2023)) are both steel grades.
Both fall under the Alloy Steel category.
SAE J404 9260 is typically used for chemistry-only alloy steel grade; see the composition notes for product scope, while CSA G40.21 350WT is commonly used for bridges,offshore structures,heavy fabrication,pressure vessels,cranes,structural components.
SAE J404 9260 is defined under SAE International, originating from United States, while CSA G40.21 350WT is defined under Canadian Standards Association (CSA), originating from Canada.
As per chemical composition, SAE J404 9260 vs CSA G40.21 350WT is a 80.1% 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%.
Matched by chemical composition and mechanical properties, not a formal equivalence claim. Always verify against the applicable standard before substitution.
Mechanical Properties
Property
SAE J404 9260
CSA G40.21 350WT
Tensile Strength
Not specified
480-650 MPa
Yield Strength
Not specified
350 MPa min
Elongation
Not specified
18-22 %
Typical Applications
SAE J404 9260
Chemistry-only alloy steel grade; see the composition notes for product scope
SAE J404 9260 specifies Si which is not specified for CSA G40.21 350WT.
Can SAE J404 9260 Be Substituted With CSA G40.21 350WT?
SAE J404 9260 and CSA G40.21 350WT 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 SAE J404 9260 and CSA G40.21 350WT?
SAE J404 9260 specifies Si which is not specified for CSA G40.21 350WT.
Can SAE J404 9260 be substituted with CSA G40.21 350WT?
SAE J404 9260 and CSA G40.21 350WT 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.