Hastelloy C-276 vs Incoloy 825: Acid & Chloride Guide

By Shanghai Hangbo Alloy Group Co., Ltd. - China Supplier | ISO 9001:2015 | Est. 2012

Contact: sales@hangboalloy.com | hangbo@nickel-alloy.com | WhatsApp (Lisa): +86 13611656360

Quick Answer: Hastelloy C-276 vs Incoloy 825

Choose Hastelloy C-276 for reducing and mixed acids, wet chlorine, hypochlorite and severe chloride pitting service, and choose Incoloy 825 for mildly reducing to oxidising acid service, sulphuric and phosphoric acid at moderate concentration, and where a lower-cost nickel-iron alloy is adequate. Select C-276 whenever molybdenum-bearing resistance is essential.

Key Takeaways

• C-276 is the molybdenum-heavy choice and 825 is the iron-heavy choice. C-276 carries roughly 15-17% molybdenum plus tungsten on a nickel base, while 825 carries only 2.5-3.5% molybdenum on a nickel-iron base, and that single difference explains most of the performance gap.
• C-276 wins on reducing acids, mixed acids and chlorides. Hydrochloric acid, wet chlorine, hypochlorite, sulphuric acid below about 60% concentration, and chloride pitting and crevice service all belong to C-276.
• 825 wins on oxidising and mixed oxidising-reducing acids and on cost. Nitric acid, nitric-hydrofluoric mixtures, phosphoric acid and many sulphuric acid streams at moderate strength are handled well by 825 at roughly half the C-276 price.
• Neither alloy is automatically the "stronger" one. Both are solid-solution austenitic alloys that cannot be hardened by heat treatment, and both are supplied annealed; 825 gains a small advantage from titanium stabilisation against intergranular attack.
• The selection is decided by the medium, not by the mechanical data sheet. Because the tensile and yield figures are broadly similar, the choice almost always turns on acid type, oxidising power, chloride level, temperature and the presence of crevices.
• Fabrication and welding are similar, but C-276 needs more care. C-276 requires a clean, low-heat-input weld, a nickel-base filler and post-weld solution annealing where the service is severe, while 825 is more forgiving in the workshop.

Two Different Alloy Families: Ni-Mo-Cr Against Ni-Fe-Cr

The honest answer to the question is that C-276 and 825 are not competitors in the same weight class; they are two different alloy families that overlap only in a band of moderate acid duty. C-276 is a nickel-molybdenum-chromium alloy in which molybdenum and tungsten provide resistance to reducing acids and to chloride pitting, while 825 is a nickel-iron-chromium alloy in which a modest molybdenum addition plus copper and titanium provides resistance to a broader but milder range of acids. A buyer who compares the two on price alone will usually end up with 825 everywhere, and a buyer who compares them on "corrosion resistance" alone will usually end up with C-276 everywhere; the correct answer is to split the plant by stream chemistry.

Hastelloy C-276 is the standard-bearer of the Ni-Mo-Cr family. It is a low-carbon, silicon-controlled alloy formulated so that it can be welded without the precipitation of grain-boundary phases that would otherwise make the weld heat-affected zone susceptible to intergranular corrosion. Its chromium content gives it useful resistance to oxidising media, its molybdenum and tungsten content gives it resistance to reducing acids and to chloride pitting, and its nickel-rich matrix keeps it metallurgically stable and tough. It is worth noting that C-276 is not a compromise grade: it remains one of the most broadly corrosion-resistant wrought alloys available in commercial quantity, and it is commonly selected precisely where several different aggressive streams pass through one piece of equipment and no single cheaper alloy covers all of them.

Incoloy 825 belongs to a different design tradition. It is a nickel-iron-chromium alloy with about 38-46% nickel, 19.5-23.5% chromium, 2.5-3.5% molybdenum and 1.5-3.0% copper, stabilised with titanium. The copper addition is the detail that buyers most often overlook and that most often explains a successful application, because copper improves resistance to sulphuric acid, while the molybdenum content provides resistance to pitting and to moderately reducing conditions. The titanium addition is there to tie up carbon as a stable carbide so that the alloy resists intergranular corrosion after welding, and it allows 825 to be used in the as-welded condition in most acid service. Our Hastelloy alloy range and Incoloy alloy range cover both families in bar, plate, tube and finished components, so a package can be split by stream rather than forced onto one grade.

The practical distinction to carry into selection is therefore about the chemistry of the stream rather than about a ranking of the alloys. Where a stream is strongly reducing, strongly chloridic, or contains several acids at once, C-276 is the answer. Where a stream is oxidising, or is a mixed stream with an adequate oxidising component, or is a dilute-to-moderate acid stream at moderate temperature, 825 is usually adequate and considerably cheaper. The sections that follow examine composition, mechanical data, acid corrosion, chloride corrosion, heat treatment, standards and selection in that order, and each one narrows the decision.

Chemistry Compared: Composition Ranges That Decide Service

The composition specification is where the two alloys diverge, and the divergence is deliberate rather than incidental. C-276 is specified around 57% nickel with 14.5-16.5% chromium, 15.0-17.0% molybdenum, 3.0-4.5% tungsten and 4.0-7.0% iron, while 825 is specified around 38-46% nickel with 19.5-23.5% chromium, 2.5-3.5% molybdenum, 1.5-3.0% copper, 0.6-1.2% titanium and an iron balance of 22% or more. In other words, C-276 buys corrosion resistance with refractory metal at a high alloying cost, and 825 buys adequate resistance with a large iron fraction that reduces the alloying cost substantially.

The table below sets out the specified ranges for the two grades as they are normally written in the material standards. Where a value is a range it is a standard requirement; where a value is described as typical it is a practical expectation that should not be treated as a specification limit.

Element	C-276 (UNS N10276), %	825 (UNS N08825), %	Function in service	Standard basis
Nickel	balance (about 57 typical)	38.0-46.0	matrix, acid and chloride resistance	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Chromium	14.5-16.5	19.5-23.5	oxidising acid and high-temperature resistance	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Molybdenum	15.0-17.0	2.5-3.5	reducing acid and pitting resistance	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Tungsten	3.0-4.5	not specified	additional reducing-acid resistance	ASTM B575
Iron	4.0-7.0	22.0 min (balance)	matrix economy, thermal expansion	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Copper	not specified	1.5-3.0	sulphuric acid resistance	ASTM B424
Titanium	not specified	0.6-1.2	stabilisation against intergranular attack	ASTM B424
Cobalt	2.5 max	not specified	residual from melting	ASTM B575
Manganese	1.0 max	1.0 max	deoxidation, residual	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Silicon	0.08 max	0.5 max	welding and phase control	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Carbon	0.01 max	0.05 max	intergranular corrosion control	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Sulphur	0.03 max	0.03 max	hot workability	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Vanadium	0.35 max	not specified	residual control	ASTM B575

Table note: Ranges are quoted from the composition clauses of ASTM B575 for the C-276 class and ASTM B424 for the 825 class, with the corresponding ASME SB575 and EN 10204 documentation practice applying to the material actually supplied; a buyer should always confirm the controlling edition and the product form, because a grade may be covered by several standards that differ slightly in the limit values. The single most important entry is molybdenum: at about sixteen percent in C-276, it dominates the alloy's resistance to reducing acids and to chloride pitting, and at about three percent in 825 it provides only moderate assistance in those media. The second most important entry in practice is carbon. C-276 is limited to 0.01% carbon so that welds can retain corrosion resistance without post-weld heat treatment, while 825 relies on titanium stabilisation rather than on a very low carbon content to achieve the same end.

A consequence of the chemistry that buyers should understand before they write a specification is that the two alloys cannot be substituted for each other on the basis of a certificate review. A chemical analysis will distinguish them immediately, so positive material identification to a method such as the one described in ASTM E1476 is a reliable check, and substitution is detectable. The chemistry also explains the density difference: C-276 has a density of about 8.89 g/cm3, while 825 is about 8.14 g/cm3, so a C-276 component is heavier for the same dimensions and a price comparison made on a per-kilogram basis already reflects a genuine material difference rather than a commercial preference. Finally, the chemistry explains why the two alloys behave differently in fabrication: the refractory-metal-rich C-276 resists hot deformation more stubbornly and is more sensitive to contamination during welding, while the iron-rich 825 behaves more like a heavily alloyed stainless steel in the workshop.

Mechanical Properties and Strength at Temperature

The mechanical answer is that neither alloy is a high-strength material in the sense that a precipitation-hardening alloy is, and both are supplied in the annealed condition with comparable strength levels. The minimum tensile strength of C-276 in annealed bar and plate form is generally specified at 690 MPa with a yield strength at 0.2% offset of about 283 MPa and an elongation of 40%, while 825 is specified at about 586 MPa tensile, 241 MPa yield and 30% elongation. The figures are close enough that mechanical data rarely decides the selection; what decides it is that both alloys retain useful strength at temperature, and that C-276 retains it to a considerably higher temperature than 825.

The table below compares the two alloys on the properties a specification normally asks a mill to certify. The minimum values are standard minima for the annealed condition; the remaining figures are typical values offered for engineering guidance and should not be used as acceptance limits.

Property	C-276 (UNS N10276)	825 (UNS N08825)	Basis
Tensile strength, annealed	690 MPa min	586 MPa min	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Yield strength, 0.2% offset, annealed	283 MPa min	241 MPa min	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Elongation in 50 mm	40% min	30% min	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424
Hardness, annealed	about 90 HRB, typical	about 80 HRB, typical	ASTM E18 practice
Modulus of elasticity	about 205 GPa, typical	about 196 GPa, typical	typical
Density	about 8.89 g/cm3, typical	about 8.14 g/cm3, typical	typical
Useful service temperature, pressure service	to about 1040 C, typical	to about 540 C, typical	code-dependent
Useful service temperature, oxidation only	to about 1090 C, typical	to about 700 C, typical	typical
Hardening mechanism	solid solution only	solid solution only	both
Tension test method	ASTM E8 / E8M	ASTM E8 / E8M	test method

Table note: The minimum values quoted against ASTM B575 and ASTM B424 are standard property requirements for the annealed condition and are the figures a mill certificate should show; all remaining values are typical engineering values and are not specification limits. The practical point for a buyer is that the mechanical comparison is not the selection criterion, because the two alloys are within about fifteen percent of each other on strength and both are far more tolerant of thermal expansion and thermal cycling than a high-strength alloy would be. The one mechanical difference that does matter is the temperature ceiling: C-276 is normally considered usable in pressure service to roughly 1040 C and in oxidising atmospheres to about 1090 C, while 825 is normally limited to about 540 C in pressure service and to about 700 C for oxidation resistance, so a hot stream will often decide the grade by itself.

Two secondary points are worth recording. First, both alloys are solid-solution strengthened, which means that neither can be strengthened by ageing, that cold work is the only practical way to raise their strength, and that a specification which asks for a higher strength must accept a cold-worked condition with reduced ductility and, in some services, reduced corrosion resistance. In C-276 in particular, cold work can be detrimental to corrosion performance in the most severe media, so a high-strength requirement in a corrosion-critical application should be questioned rather than accepted. Second, both alloys have relatively high coefficients of thermal expansion compared with a ferritic or duplex steel, and 825 in particular has a substantially higher expansion coefficient than C-276, which matters in heat-exchanger design and in transitions to other materials, because differential expansion drives stress into the tube-to-tubesheet joint and into the weld where a transition is made. Our news and buying guides return to these design interactions where they decide a material substitution.

In thermal-fatigue terms the two alloys behave similarly enough that the choice is usually settled by the process fluid. Where a component sees both a hot oxidising stream and a cooler reducing stream, C-276 is normally the only one of the two that can cover both, and the cost of the alloy is recovered by removing a separate item of equipment. Where the component sees only an intermediate-temperature acid duty, the higher-temperature capability of C-276 is irrelevant and the choice falls back to corrosion performance and price.

Corrosion Performance in Acids: Reducing, Oxidising and Mixed

The direct answer is that C-276 is the better alloy in reducing acids and in mixed acids that contain a strong reducing component, while 825 is the better value in oxidising acids and in mixed acids with enough oxidising power to keep the alloy passive. The reason is electrochemistry rather than metallurgy: molybdenum and tungsten raise resistance to hydrogen-generating, oxygen-poor conditions such as hydrochloric acid and dilute sulphuric acid, while chromium and the passive film it supports resist oxygen-rich conditions such as nitric acid. Hydrochloric acid is the cleanest test of the distinction, because 825 depends on a passive film that hydrochloric acid destroys, and ferric or cupric ions in a stream change the ranking by making the medium more oxidising.

The table below sets out the practical behaviour of the two alloys by acid family. The entries summarise normal engineering practice and corrosion-test experience rather than a guaranteed limit, and any final selection should be supported by laboratory testing in the actual process stream or by plant reference data.

Medium and condition	C-276 (UNS N10276)	825 (UNS N08825)	Selection verdict
Hydrochloric acid, any concentration, ambient to moderate temperature	good, broadly usable	poor, not recommended	choose C-276
Sulphuric acid below about 60%, ambient to moderate temperature	good	moderate, concentration and aeration dependent	choose C-276
Sulphuric acid above about 60%, moderate temperature	moderate to good	moderate	test both, often C-276
Sulphuric acid with oxidising impurities or aeration	good	good, copper assists	either, 825 on cost
Nitric acid, all normal concentrations	moderate, chromium-limited	good to excellent	choose 825
Nitric-hydrofluoric pickling mixtures	poor, attacked	good, standard material	choose 825
Phosphoric acid, commercial wet-process grades	good	good, widely used	choose 825 on cost
Mixed acid with a strong reducing component	good	limited	choose C-276
Mixed acid with a strong oxidising component	good	good	either, 825 on cost
Wet chlorine gas and chlorine-saturated brine	good, a standard material	not recommended	choose C-276
Hypochlorite and chlorine dioxide bleaching liquors	good	limited	choose C-276
Organic acids, formic and acetic at moderate strength	good	moderate to good	either, test both
Acetic acid with chloride contamination	good	limited	choose C-276
Seawater, high-velocity	good, pitting resistant	moderate, low velocity and clean service	choose C-276
Flue-gas desulphurisation and chloride-bearing scrubber liquors	good	moderate	choose C-276

Table note: The table is engineering guidance drawn from published corrosion data for UNS N10276 and UNS N08825 and from normal selection practice; it is not a substitute for a project material selection document, and no entry should be read as a warranty of performance at a specific concentration and temperature. The governing point is that the two alloys are separated by the oxidising power of the medium. Where the stream supplies its own oxidiser, 825 can outperform its modest molybdenum content because its chromium-rich passive film remains intact; where the stream is a reducing acid that strips that film, only the molybdenum-rich C-276 survives. ASTM G28 practice, which uses boiling ferric sulphate-sulphuric acid and boiling nitric acid to rank nickel alloys, captures exactly this distinction, and where a buyer has test data of that kind for the specific medium it should outweigh any general table.

Three practical cautions belong with this table. The first is that concentration and temperature are not independent variables, and a rule stated for "moderate temperature" breaks down as soon as the temperature rises by forty degrees; a stream that 825 handles comfortably at ambient may attack it severely in a preheater. The second is that impurities decide as much as the principal acid, so a nominally reducing stream becomes oxidising with a few hundred parts per million of ferric ion, and a nominally oxidising stream becomes reducing when dissolved oxygen is stripped out in a deaerator or a closed loop. The third is that a corrosion allowance is not a substitute for material selection in the grades considered here, because the acid attack on 825 in a reducing medium is not a uniform metal loss that an allowance can absorb but a rapid general or localised attack that consumes a wall in a short time. Where a plant has a mixed-service header that carries several streams, our knowledge base sets out how a single C-276 item can be justified against two separate items in cheaper materials, and this is one of the few cases where a more expensive alloy is the cheaper engineering decision.

Chloride Service: Pitting, Crevice and Stress Corrosion Cracking

In chloride service the answer is more one-sided than in acid service: C-276 is the correct choice wherever chlorides are present at concentration, temperature or velocity that would trouble a conventional stainless steel, and 825 is acceptable only in clean, low-chloride, low-temperature, crevice-free conditions. The reason is the Pitting Resistance Equivalent Number, which is driven by molybdenum together with chromium and, in C-276, by tungsten; with about sixteen percent molybdenum and four percent tungsten, C-276 sits at the top of the wrought-alloy range, while 825 at about three percent molybdenum sits only modestly above 316L and well below a super-austenitic or a 6% molybdenum grade.

Pitting and crevice corrosion are the first chloride mechanisms to consider, and they are best assessed with the ferric chloride test practices described in ASTM G48 rather than by a calculation alone. C-276 is normally expected to resist pitting and crevice attack in ferric chloride well above the critical temperatures that mark the limit for 825, and it is routinely used for chloride-bearing scrubber liquors, brine, bleach and seawater service where 825 would pit. The critical distinction for a buyer is that pit initiation depends on the local environment rather than on the bulk analysis of the stream, so a crevice under a gasket, a deposit under a baffle or a stagnant drain line can produce pitting in a stream whose bulk chloride level looks harmless. C-276 tolerates those conditions considerably better than 825, but even C-276 is not immune, and the design should eliminate crevices and stagnant zones rather than rely on the alloy.

Stress corrosion cracking in chlorides is the second mechanism, and here the ranking is less absolute than buyers sometimes expect. The conventional view is that the high-nickel alloys are far more resistant to chloride stress corrosion cracking than the 300-series stainless steels, and that is broadly true, with C-276 and 825 both being substantially more resistant than 304 or 316. However, under severe conditions of high chloride concentration, high temperature and applied or residual stress, cracking has been reported in nickel-iron alloys, and the practical guidance is that 825 should not be used in hot concentrated chloride service under significant stress, while C-276 remains the safer of the two and is the grade normally specified where chloride stress corrosion cracking is the design case. Test practice for chloride stress corrosion cracking is described in ASTM G36, which uses boiling magnesium chloride, and the results of such tests should be treated as a ranking tool rather than as a service limit.

Where sour service is involved, the selection is governed by a different document. NACE MR0175 and ISO 15156 impose hardness limits and material qualification requirements on wetted components in oil and gas production, and both alloys are addressed by that framework within defined limits, so the buyer should confirm the specific environmental limits that apply to the grade rather than assume that a corrosion-resistant nickel alloy is automatically acceptable. In practice C-276 and its related Ni-Mo-Cr grades are widely used for sour components because their hardness can be controlled within limits, whereas high-strength conditions in other alloys can exceed the permitted hardness. Where hydrogen sulphide and chlorides occur together, the combination is more damaging than either alone, and C-276 is the more common choice for that duty.

Two design points complete this section. First, chloride service is usually a fitness-for-purpose question about a system rather than about a metal: the alloy, the velocity, the crevices, the deposits and the temperature window have to be considered together, and the most common field failure in 825 is not a bulk chemistry problem but localised attack in a stagnant or creviced location. Second, where a plant wants to use 825 to save cost in a chloride-bearing system, the acceptable approach is to confirm the actual chloride level, temperature and oxygen content, to remove crevices and stagnant lines, and to accept that the grade is being used at the edge of its capability; where those conditions cannot be guaranteed, C-276 is the answer and the additional cost is a reliability investment. Our Inconel alloy range includes the higher-molybdenum nickel-chromium grades that sit between 825 and C-276 on this scale, and they are often the pragmatic compromise where C-276 is technically ideal but commercially difficult for a whole system.

Heat Treatment, Fabrication and Welding

The direct answer on heat treatment is that neither alloy responds to precipitation hardening, both are supplied in a solution-annealed condition, and the workshop difference is that 825 is more tolerant of welding while C-276 requires cleaner practice and, in severe service, a post-weld solution anneal. C-276 is solution treated at roughly 1065-1120 C followed by rapid cooling to retain a single-phase structure and to keep carbon and other elements in solution, while 825 is annealed at roughly 925-980 C and cooled rapidly, and its titanium addition stabilises carbon so that the as-welded condition retains resistance to intergranular corrosion.

Thermal or fabrication step	C-276 (UNS N10276)	825 (UNS N08825)	Basis
Solution annealing temperature	1065-1120 C, typical	925-980 C, typical	ASTM B575 / ASTM B424 practice
Cooling after annealing	rapid quench or fast air	rapid quench or fast air	to retain single phase
Age hardening	not applicable	not applicable	solid-solution alloys
Stress relief	generally avoided below the annealing range	generally avoided below the annealing range	sensitisation risk
As-welded service capability	good, low carbon assists	good, titanium stabilisation assists	ASTM G28 ranking practice
Post-weld heat treatment in severe service	full solution anneal advised	usually not required	project specification
Filler metal class	nickel-molybdenum-chromium filler	nickel-chromium-iron filler	matching composition practice
Weld cleanliness	high, contamination sensitive	moderate, more forgiving	fabrication practice
Hot forming range	1065-1200 C, typical	870-1170 C, typical	typical
Cold forming	work hardens, anneal between steps	work hardens, anneal between steps	typical
Machining character	gummy, work hardening	gummy, work hardening	typical
Descaling after hot work	pickling and abrasive cleaning	pickling and abrasive cleaning	fabrication practice

Table note: Temperature ranges are typical practice supported by the annealing requirements of ASTM B575 and ASTM B424 rather than being acceptance limits, and the governing requirement is the thermal treatment stated on the purchase order together with the certificate of heat treatment required by EN 10204. The important fabrication point is that the low carbon content of C-276 is what allows a welded C-276 item to retain its corrosion resistance in the heat-affected zone without a post-weld heat treatment in most services, while 825 achieves the same end through titanium stabilisation, so both grades are available as-welded for the majority of acid duties. Where the service is severe, or where a C-276 item will be used in a strongly reducing acid at temperature, a full post-weld solution anneal is the prudent specification, and it should be stated on the enquiry rather than assumed.

On the shop floor the two alloys behave more similarly than their chemistry would suggest, and both are gummy to machine, prone to work hardening and best handled with generous feeds and rigid tooling. Welding practice is where they separate. C-276 should be welded with a matching nickel-molybdenum-chromium filler, with controlled heat input, with interpass temperature kept low, and with scrupulous cleanliness, because sulphur, phosphorus, lead and other low-melting contaminants cause cracking and a heat-affected zone that has been contaminated or overheated can corrode preferentially. 825 is welded with a matching nickel-chromium-iron filler and tolerates slightly more relaxed practice, which is one reason it is often preferred for a fabrication that will be built in a general-purpose shop rather than in a controlled environment. For both alloys the weld joint should be designed to avoid excessive restraint, and welding procedures should be qualified to a recognised code with the mechanical testing carried out in accordance with ASTM E8 or the relevant section of the fabrication code.

One further fabrication consideration is often decisive in acid service: surface condition. Both alloys depend on a clean, passive oxide for much of their resistance, and embedded iron, weld spatter, heat tint and grinding contamination create initiation sites that can lead to pitting even in a medium the alloy is rated for. The correct finishing practice is to pickle and passivate after fabrication, to remove heat tint completely, to avoid carbon steel tooling on the surface and to keep the finished surface smooth enough that deposits cannot lodge. Where a component is supplied as bar or plate for a buyer's own fabrication, the material should be ordered with a finish and a cleanliness level appropriate to the service, and our news and buying guides discuss the surface-condition requirements that most often appear in a fabrication specification.

Standards Cross-Reference: US, GB, JIS, DIN/EN and GOST

The direct answer is that both alloys are covered by the same five families of standard, and a buyer working to a Chinese, Japanese, European or Russian specification can obtain an equivalent material provided the grade designation and the product form are both named. The US system is built on the ASTM material standards with ASME equivalents and AMS aerospace specifications; the Chinese system is built on the GB/T corrosion-resistant alloy grade and product standards; the Japanese system is built on the JIS G 4901 to G 4904 series; the European system is built on the DIN and EN designation practice using the Werkstoff number; and the Russian system is built on GOST grade and product standards.

System	C-276 (UNS N10276)	825 (UNS N08825)	Note
US (ASTM/ASME)	ASTM B575 plate, sheet and strip; ASTM B574 rod and bar; ASTM B622 and B619 pipe; ASTM B626 tube; ASTM B564 forgings; ASME SB575; AMS 5530	ASTM B424 plate, sheet and strip; ASTM B425 rod and bar; ASTM B423 seamless pipe and tube; ASTM B564 forgings	buy the form standard, not only the alloy
GB	GB/T 14992 and GB/T 15007 corrosion-resistant alloy grade system; customary C-276 class designation NS334	GB/T 14992 and GB/T 15007 corrosion-resistant alloy grade system; customary 825 class designation NS142	grade plus product standard required
JIS	JIS G 4901, G 4902, G 4903 and G 4904 for C-276 class bars, plate, seamless and welded tube; customary NW 0276 designation	JIS G 4901, G 4902, G 4903 and G 4904 for the 825 class; customary NCF 825 designation	JIS G 4901 to G 4904 cover bar, plate, seamless and welded forms
DIN / EN	W.Nr 2.4819, NiMo16Cr15W, covered by DIN 17744 and EN 10095 practice	W.Nr 2.4858, NiCr21Mo, covered by DIN 17744 and EN 10095 practice	Werkstoff number is the reliable cross-reference
GOST	GOST 5632 grade system, customary ХН65МВ (ЭП567) analogue, tubes to GOST 9941	GOST 5632 grade system, customary ХН38ВТ class analogue	confirm the grade and the product standard together

Table note: Designations are given as standard references and customary cross-references; where a designation is described as customary it reflects normal translation practice between systems rather than a single officially harmonised grade number, and the controlling document remains the standard named on the purchase order. The reliable way to cross systems is to match composition and property requirements rather than grade names, and then to confirm that the standard selected covers the product form required, because a grade designation alone does not define whether the item is bar, plate, seamless tube or a forging. Where a project requires a dual-certified material, both the US and the local standard should be named on the enquiry so that the mill can verify that one heat satisfies both sets of limits. The World Trade Organisation-type nomenclature of these systems is not harmonised, so EN 10204 type 3.1 documentation naming the standard, the grade, the heat number and the actual test results is the practical documentary link between them.

Three warnings follow from the table. First, a grade designation without a product-form standard is not an order: a specification that says only "C-276" or "2.4819" leaves the mill or the stockist to choose the form standard, and the resulting certificate may not match the buyer's quality plan. Second, the customary Chinese and Russian cross-references should be written as such, with the composition limits attached, because the specific limits of a local grade may differ from the original alloy in a way that matters in an aggressive service. Third, and most importantly for acid and chloride duty, a formally equivalent grade from a different standard is only equivalent if the heat treatment condition is the same, since an annealed material and a stress-relieved material may both meet the composition and still behave differently in service. Our contact page will confirm the full cross-reference set for a specific enquiry and state the standard and form that will appear on the certificate.

Selection Matrix, Exception Cases and 2026 Price Reference

The direct answer, stated as a decision list, is to choose C-276 for reducing acids, wet chlorine, hypochlorite, high-chloride or creviced service, mixed streams whose composition is uncertain, and any duty where a single item must cover several different aggressive streams; and to choose 825 for nitric acid, nitric-hydrofluoric pickling liquors, phosphoric acid, aerated or oxidising sulphuric acid, and moderate acid service where cost is decisive. The exception cases are equally important, and they are the reason a blanket rule is dangerous: a stream that looks reducing on the flowsheet but contains oxidising impurities, and a stream that looks like a dilute acid but is stagnant and creviced, both reverse the simple guidance.

Duty or condition	Recommended alloy	Alternative	Reason
Hydrochloric acid service	C-276	none from this pair	825 lacks molybdenum for reducing acid
Sulphuric acid below 60%, or unaerated	C-276	825 where dilute and cool	reducing conditions favour molybdenum
Sulphuric acid aerated or with oxidising ions	825	C-276 where chlorides present	passive film maintained on 825
Nitric acid and pickling mixtures	825	none from this pair	chromium-rich alloy is the standard material
Phosphoric acid, wet process	825	C-276 where chloride-bearing	copper assists in 825
Wet chlorine and hypochlorite	C-276	none from this pair	825 is attacked
High-chloride brine, bleach, scrubber liquor	C-276	higher-Mo nickel-chromium grade	pitting and crevice resistance
Sour service with chlorides	C-276	qualified grade within NACE limits	hardness and cracking control
Mixed acid of uncertain composition	C-276	test both, then decide	broad-spectrum alloy insurance
Heat exchanger, acid on one side and cooling water on the other	C-276	825 if water side is clean and cool	dual exposure argues for the wider alloy
Moderate acid duty, cost-driven project	825	C-276 where service is marginal	roughly half the material cost
High-temperature oxidising service	C-276	825 up to about 700 C	temperature ceiling differs

Table note: This selection table is engineering guidance for the two grades under discussion and is not a project material selection document; each entry should be confirmed by the responsible engineer against the actual stream analysis, temperature, aeration, chloride level, velocity and crevice conditions, and against any applicable code. The two exception cases most often missed in practice are the oxidising-impurity case, where a reducing stream is rendered oxidising by a small amount of ferric or cupric ion and 825 becomes viable again, and the stagnant-crevice case, where a stream that 825 handles in a flowing line causes localised attack in a dead leg, a gasket crevice or a deposit-covered wall. Both are reasons to specify the alloy from the worst credible condition rather than the design-basis analysis.

Price completes the decision, and it is the reason 825 keeps its place in a plant even where C-276 is technically superior. The figures below are reference ranges for 2026 on an EXW Shanghai basis and are provided for budgeting only; they are not a quotation, they are not an offer, and the governing price is the one agreed in a contract.

Product form	C-276, 2026 EXW Shanghai, USD/kg	825, 2026 EXW Shanghai, USD/kg	Basis
Plate and sheet, standard thickness	55-95	22-38	2026, EXW Shanghai, reference range only
Round bar, standard diameter	50-85	20-35	2026, EXW Shanghai, reference range only
Seamless tube	70-120	28-48	2026, EXW Shanghai, reference range only
Welded pipe and tube	60-105	26-44	2026, EXW Shanghai, reference range only
Forged flange or fitting	90-160	35-65	2026, EXW Shanghai, reference range only
Fastener from bar	85-150	40-75	2026, EXW Shanghai, reference range only
Strip and narrow coil	65-115	28-50	2026, EXW Shanghai, reference range only
Wire, small diameter	80-140	40-72	2026, EXW Shanghai, reference range only

Table note: Reference ranges only, 2026, EXW Shanghai, in US dollars per kilogram, subject to movement in the nickel, molybdenum, chromium and tungsten markets; these figures are indicative, they are not a quotation, and delivered prices depend on quantity, size, tolerance, test scope, documentation and delivery terms. The consistent pattern is that 825 costs roughly forty to sixty percent of C-276 for the same form, because the molybdenum and tungsten content of C-276 is the dominant cost driver and C-276 is also produced in smaller volume. The economically rational approach is therefore to specify 825 wherever the stream chemistry and the chloride level genuinely permit it, and to reserve C-276 for the duties where its molybdenum content is doing necessary work rather than merely providing margin.

Standard Index

Standard	Title / scope	Covers	Form
ASTM B575	Low-carbon Ni-Cr-Mo and Ni-Cr-Mo-W alloy plate, sheet and strip	composition + mechanical	plate, sheet, strip
ASTM B574	Low-carbon Ni-Cr-Mo and Ni-Cr-Mo-W alloy rod and bar	composition + mechanical	bar, rod
ASTM B622	Ni-Cr-Mo alloy seamless pipe and tube	composition + mechanical	seamless pipe, tube
ASTM B619	Ni-Cr-Mo alloy welded pipe	composition + mechanical	welded pipe
ASTM B626	Ni-Cr-Mo alloy welded tube	composition + mechanical	welded tube
ASTM B424	Ni-Fe-Cr-Mo-Cu alloy plate, sheet and strip	composition + mechanical	plate, sheet, strip
ASTM B425	Ni-Fe-Cr-Mo-Cu alloy rod and bar	composition + mechanical	bar, rod
ASTM B423	Ni-Fe-Cr-Mo-Cu alloy seamless pipe and tube	composition + mechanical	seamless pipe, tube
ASTM B564	Nickel alloy forgings	composition + mechanical	forging, flange, fitting
ASTM B366	Factory-made wrought nickel and nickel alloy fittings	dimensions + material	wrought fitting
ASTM B906	General requirements for flat-rolled nickel and nickel alloys	general requirements	plate, sheet, strip
AMS 5530	Corrosion and heat-resistant nickel alloy sheet, strip and plate (C-276 class)	aerospace material specification	sheet, strip, plate
ASME SB575	ASME equivalent of ASTM B575	composition + mechanical	plate, sheet, strip
ASTM E8 / E8M	Tension testing of metallic materials	test method	all forms
ASTM G48	Pitting and crevice corrosion resistance in ferric chloride	test method	coupon
ASTM G28	Detecting susceptibility to intergranular attack in wrought nickel alloys	test method	coupon
ASTM G36	Stress corrosion cracking in boiling magnesium chloride	test method	coupon
ASTM E18	Rockwell hardness testing	test method	all forms
ASTM E1476	Metals identification and positive material identification	test method	all forms
NACE MR0175 / ISO 15156	Materials for use in H2S-containing oil and gas service	material and hardness limits	all wetted parts
EN 10204	Inspection document types, 2.2, 3.1 and 3.2	inspection documents	all forms
GB/T 14992	Grade designation for superalloys	grade designation	all forms
GB/T 15007	Grade designation for corrosion-resistant alloys	grade designation	all forms
JIS G 4901	Corrosion-resistant and heat-resistant superalloy bars	composition + mechanical	bar
JIS G 4902	Corrosion-resistant and heat-resistant superalloy plate and sheet	composition + mechanical	plate, sheet
JIS G 4903	Corrosion-resistant and heat-resistant superalloy seamless tube	composition + mechanical	seamless tube
JIS G 4904	Corrosion-resistant and heat-resistant superalloy welded tube	composition + mechanical	welded tube
DIN 17744	Wrought nickel alloys, composition	composition	all wrought forms
EN 10095	Heat-resisting steels and nickel alloys	composition + mechanical	all forms
W.Nr 2.4819 / 2.4858	Werkstoff numbers for the C-276 class and the 825 class	designation	all forms
GOST 5632	Corrosion-resistant, heat-resistant and high-alloy steels and alloys	grade system	all forms
GOST 9941	Corrosion-resistant steel seamless tubes	composition + mechanical	seamless tube
ISO 9001	Quality management systems	system certification	all forms

Table note: Standards are listed by number and scope; where an edition year is not quoted the latest edition applies and the controlling edition is the edition named on the purchase order. The list deliberately separates three kinds of document, because a quotation that confuses them is not comparable: product standards that define the alloy and the form, such as ASTM B575, B574, B424 and B425; test-method standards that define how a property is measured, such as ASTM E8, G48, G28 and E1476; and service or documentation frameworks, such as NACE MR0175 and ISO 15156 and EN 10204. A purchase order for either alloy should name the product standard, the grade with its UNS or Werkstoff number, the condition, the size and tolerance, the test scope and the document type, because each of those elements changes the price and each of them is relied upon when the material arrives.

FAQ

Q1: Which alloy should I choose for hydrochloric acid service?

Choose Hastelloy C-276. Hydrochloric acid is the clearest example of a reducing acid, meaning that it generates hydrogen at the metal surface and does not supply the oxidising species that would maintain a protective passive film. Incoloy 825 depends heavily on that passive film, and although it has modest molybdenum and copper additions, its roughly three percent molybdenum is far below the level needed to resist hydrochloric acid at appreciable concentration or temperature. C-276 carries about sixteen percent molybdenum plus tungsten and is a recognised standard material for hydrochloric acid service across a wide range of concentrations at moderate temperature. The exceptions to watch are the presence of dissolved oxygen or of oxidising ions such as ferric and cupric species, which can make a hydrochloric acid stream behave more like a mixed acid and improve the outlook for 825. Even then, the chloride content of hydrochloric acid is enough to raise pitting and crevice concerns, and C-276 remains the safer specification. Where the concentration is very low and the temperature is ambient, a high-molybdenum stainless steel may be considered as an economy option, but between this pair the answer is C-276.

Q2: Can Incoloy 825 be used in seawater or high-chloride brine?

Only in narrow conditions, and usually not in preference to C-276. Incoloy 825 is a nickel-iron-chromium alloy with about three percent molybdenum, which places it only modestly above 316L in pitting resistance and well below the six-percent-molybdenum stainless steels and the nickel-chromium-molybdenum alloys. In clean, flowing, aerated seawater at low velocity and moderate temperature, 825 has been used successfully in heat exchangers and piping, and its resistance to chloride stress corrosion cracking is good enough that it has a real service record. In high-chloride brine, bleach, chlorine-bearing scrubber liquors, or any location with crevices, deposits or stagnant flow, 825 will pit and crevice, and it should not be specified. C-276, with about sixteen percent molybdenum and four percent tungsten, is the correct choice for those duties and is routinely supplied for scrubber, brine and chlorinated service. The practical design advice is to remove crevices and stagnant lines whatever the alloy, because pitting begins in the local environment rather than in the bulk stream, and then to select the alloy from the worst credible chloride level and temperature rather than the design-basis analysis.

Q3: Is Hastelloy C-276 worth the extra cost over Incoloy 825?

It is worth it whenever the molybdenum content is doing necessary work, and not otherwise. C-276 typically costs roughly forty to sixty percent more than 825 per kilogram, a premium driven by its molybdenum and tungsten content and by its lower production volume. That premium buys resistance to reducing acids, to wet chlorine and hypochlorite, to chloride pitting and crevice attack, and to mixed streams whose composition cannot be assured. Where the service is nitric acid, nitric-hydrofluoric pickling liquor, phosphoric acid or an aerated sulphuric acid stream, 825 performs well and the premium buys nothing, so specifying C-276 would waste money without improving reliability. The economically sound approach is to divide a plant by stream: use 825 for the oxidising and moderate acid duties, and reserve C-276 for the reducing, chloridic and uncertain duties. There is one further case in which C-276 is the cheaper answer even though it costs more per kilogram, and that is where it replaces two separate items of equipment in two different materials, or where it allows a whole system to be built in one grade. Our engineers will price both options against a stream list if you send it in.

Q4: How do I compare C-276 and 825 prices per kilogram?

Compare them on a delivered, tested, documented basis rather than on a bare price per kilogram, because the forms and the test scope change the comparison more than the alloy difference in many cases. For reference, 2026 EXW Shanghai ranges are roughly USD 55-95 per kilogram for C-276 plate and sheet against USD 22-38 for 825, and roughly USD 50-85 per kilogram for C-276 bar against USD 20-35 for 825; seamless tube, welded tube, forgings and fasteners carry higher figures for both grades and the exact level depends on size and quantity. The elements that must be fixed before a comparison is meaningful are the product standard and form, the size and tolerance, the heat treatment condition, the test scope including any corrosion test such as ASTM G48 or ASTM G28, the third-party inspection requirement, the document type under EN 10204 and the delivery terms. A price comparison that ignores the test scope is not a comparison, because a coupon test or a full certificate package can change the effective price materially, and a supplier quoting a lower figure without the tests is not quoting the same article.

Q5: What is the maximum service temperature of each alloy?

For pressure service, C-276 is normally considered usable to roughly 1040 C and Incoloy 825 to roughly 540 C, while for purely oxidising service with little or no load, C-276 is used to about 1090 C and 825 to about 700 C. The wide gap has two causes. First, nickel-molybdenum-chromium alloys retain strength and metallurgical stability to higher temperatures than nickel-iron-chromium alloys. Second, 825 contains iron as its balance element, and its oxidation resistance and creep behaviour begin to limit its usefulness well below the temperature at which C-276 remains comfortable. For any high-temperature pressure application, the governing figure is the allowable stress value in the design code rather than a general service ceiling, and the code limits must be read for the specific product form and condition. For intermediate temperatures in acid service, the temperature ceiling of C-276 is usually irrelevant, because the selection is decided by corrosion instead. Where a component must handle a hot stream, verify the code allowable stress at the design metal temperature before committing to 825, because an equipment item that is correct at 400 C can be non-compliant at 550 C for reasons that have nothing to do with corrosion.

Q6: How do the two alloys weld, and do they need post-weld heat treatment?

Both weld well with matching nickel-base filler metals, and neither normally requires post-weld heat treatment for standard acid service. C-276 is welded with a nickel-molybdenum-chromium filler at controlled heat input with a low interpass temperature, and its carbon content of about 0.01 percent ensures that the weld and heat-affected zone retain corrosion resistance without a subsequent anneal. Incoloy 825 is welded with a nickel-chromium-iron filler and relies on titanium stabilisation rather than on very low carbon to resist intergranular attack after welding, so it is also normally used as-welded. Where the service is severe, or where a C-276 item will see a strongly reducing acid at temperature, a full solution anneal at roughly 1065-1120 C after welding is the prudent specification for C-276; for 825 the annealing range is roughly 925-980 C and a post-weld anneal is rarely needed. The practical differences are cleanliness and heat input: C-276 is sensitive to sulphur, phosphorus and other low-melting contaminants, so the weld area must be clean and free of carbon steel contamination, whereas 825 tolerates a general-purpose workshop more gracefully. Welding procedures should be qualified to a recognised fabrication code with testing to ASTM E8.

Q7: Which alloy is better in sulphuric acid?

It depends on concentration and on whether the stream is aerated. Sulphuric acid is a reducing acid when it is unaerated and when it contains no oxidising impurities, and in that condition C-276 is markedly superior, with 825 limited to dilute and relatively cool service. As concentration rises above about 60 percent and especially when the acid is aerated or carries oxidising ions, the behaviour changes: 825 becomes usable and in some ranges performs well, and its copper content is specifically beneficial in sulphuric acid. The difficulty for the buyer is that real streams are rarely clean, so a nominally reducing sulphuric acid stream can become oxidising through a few hundred parts per million of ferric ion, or through entrained air, and the recommendation can change accordingly. The correct approach is to test both alloys in the actual stream or in a representative synthetic solution, and to design from the worst credible condition rather than the design-basis analysis. Where chlorides are also present, or the stream is a mixed acid, C-276 is normally the answer regardless of the oxidising character, because chlorides add a pitting risk that 825 handles poorly.

Q8: Which alloy should I use for nitric acid and pickling mixtures?

Incoloy 825, and it is the standard material for these duties. Nitric acid is strongly oxidising, so the alloy does not need to resist hydrogen generation and instead relies on a stable, chromium-rich passive film, which is exactly what 825 provides with its 19.5-23.5 percent chromium. In nitric-hydrofluoric acid pickling mixtures, 825 is the conventional choice and C-276 is not suitable, because molybdenum-rich alloys are attacked rapidly in those highly oxidising, complexing environments. The same logic applies to nitric acid service generally and to many wet-process phosphoric acid streams, where 825 is used widely and effectively. The practical cautions are temperature and concentration, which must be checked against published data or a laboratory test for the specific duty, and the presence of chlorides, which change the picture and may push the selection toward a nickel-chromium-molybdenum grade. Where a plant has both a nitric acid stream and a reducing acid stream and wishes to standardise on one material, C-276 is the grade that comes closest to covering both, but it will not survive the pickling duty, so a genuinely mixed plant should keep 825 for the oxidising duties.

Q9: Can I substitute Incoloy 825 for Hastelloy C-276 in an existing plant?

Only after a review that treats it as a material change rather than a like-for-like swap, and in most reducing-acid or high-chloride duties the answer will be no. The two alloys are not interchangeable: 825 has a different nickel content, a much lower molybdenum content, an iron balance and copper and titanium additions, so its corrosion performance, its thermal expansion and its hardness all differ. A substitution is defensible where the original C-276 was specified for a broadly oxidising or moderate acid duty with no significant chloride level and no crevices, where the temperature is well within the 825 range, and where the substitution is supported by test data or by a similar reference plant. It is not defensible where the original specification was driven by hydrochloric acid, wet chlorine, hypochlorite, high-chloride brine, creviced geometry, hydrogen sulphide together with chlorides, or a mixed stream of uncertain composition. The substitution should be recorded as a formal material change, with the wetted parts list reviewed so that no component is overlooked, because a system is only as resistant as its weakest wetted part and the gasket winding and the instrument wetted parts count.

Q10: What standards do I quote for each alloy, and how do GB, JIS, DIN/EN and GOST compare?

Quote the product standard for the form you need, with the grade designation, and add the local standard only if the project requires it. For C-276, the usual US references are ASTM B575 for plate, sheet and strip, ASTM B574 for bar, ASTM B622 and B619 for seamless and welded pipe, ASTM B626 for welded tube, ASTM B564 for forgings and ASME SB575 as the ASME equivalent, with AMS 5530 applying in aerospace work. For 825 the equivalents are ASTM B424, ASTM B425, ASTM B423 and ASTM B564. The equivalent systems are GB/T 14992 and GB/T 15007 for the Chinese grade system, JIS G 4901 to G 4904 for the Japanese series covering bar, plate, seamless tube and welded tube, the Werkstoff numbers W.Nr 2.4819 for the C-276 class and W.Nr 2.4858 for the 825 class under DIN 17744 and EN 10095 practice, and GOST 5632 with the customary ХН65МВ and ХН38ВТ class analogues. Cross-system equivalence is best established by matching composition and property limits rather than grade names, and EN 10204 documentation with actual test results is the practical link between them.

Q11: How do I verify that the material supplied is the correct alloy?

Use positive material identification to a method such as ASTM E1476 as the direct check, because the chemistry of the two alloys is very different and sub stitution between them is immediately detectable with a portable analyser. Verify the marking against the certificate and the heat number, because the marking on the plate or the component is what ties the item to the tested heat, and require an inspection document to EN 10204 type 3.1, or type 3.2 where independent endorsement by a third party is needed. For corrosion-critical duty, require the mechanical results to ASTM E8 and, where the specification calls for it, the corrosion test results such as ASTM G48 for pitting and crevice resistance or ASTM G28 for intergranular attack, reported on the material actually supplied rather than on a generic heat. Confirm the heat treatment condition as well as the analysis, because two heats with identical chemistry behave differently if one is annealed and the other is not. Where the buyer cannot perform these checks in-house, a third-party inspection by SGS, BV or TUV with witness points agreed before the order provides independent verification, and the document type should be fixed on the enquiry.

Q12: How does Shanghai Hangbo Alloy Group supply Hastelloy C-276 and Incoloy 825?

Shanghai Hangbo Alloy Group Co., Ltd. produces and supplies both grades from our mill in China, in bar from 6 to 500 mm, tube from 6 to 610 mm outside diameter, plate from 0.1 to 100 mm, forgings, welded pipe, fittings, wire from 0.05 to 10 mm and strip from 0.02 to 4.0 mm, and we quote against the product standard and the form so that the article is fully defined rather than described only by alloy. We operate an ISO 9001:2015 quality system and issue inspection documents to EN 10204 type 3.1, with third-party inspection by SGS, BV or TUV and positive material identification on delivery where the buyer requires it, and we can supply corrosion test results such as ASTM G48 or ASTM G28 when they form part of the specification. For a selection question we will review the stream chemistry, the chloride level, the temperature and the crevice conditions with you and state which of the two grades we recommend and why, rather than simply quoting the grade named on the enquiry. Send the material list, the forms, the quantities and the service conditions through our contact page and we will return a quotation with the standard, the condition and the lead time stated.

Conclusion: Match the Alloy to the Stream, Not to the Price List

The comparison ends where it began: C-276 and 825 are not substitutes, and the correct choice is decided by the chemistry of the stream rather than by a general ranking of corrosion resistance. Choose Hastelloy C-276 for hydrochloric acid and other reducing acids, for wet chlorine and hypochlorite, for high-chloride brine, scrubber liquor and other pitting and crevice duties, for sour service where chlorides are present, and for any mixed stream whose composition cannot be assured; its molybdenum and tungsten content is doing necessary work in all of those cases. Choose Incoloy 825 for nitric acid, for nitric-hydrofluoric pickling mixtures, for wet-process phosphoric acid, for aerated or oxidising sulphuric acid, and for moderate acid duty where cost is decisive; its chromium-rich passive film with a copper addition handles those streams well at roughly half the price, and specifying C-276 there buys nothing.

Three disciplines turn that guidance into a reliable installation. First, decide from the worst credible condition rather than the design-basis analysis, because a few hundred parts per million of oxidising ion or a stagnant dead leg can reverse the recommendation. Second, specify by standard and form, not by alloy name alone, so that the product standard, the condition, the size, the test scope and the document type are all defined and can be compared. Third, verify on receipt by positive material identification to ASTM E1476 and by checking the marking and certificate against the heat number, because the two alloys are easy to distinguish in a test and impossible to distinguish by eye in service.

If you have a stream list, a heat-exchanger duty or a corrosion failure to investigate, send it to us. Shanghai Hangbo Alloy Group Co., Ltd. supplies both grades from our own mill with the standard, the heat treatment and the test scope stated, and we will tell you plainly when the cheaper grade is adequate and when it is not. Contact us through our contact page with the medium, the concentration, the temperature, the chloride level and the form required, and we will return a selection recommendation with a quotation.

Contact & Complete Product Range

Shanghai Hangbo Alloy Group Co., Ltd. - China Supplier

Email: sales@hangboalloy.com | hangbo@nickel-alloy.com | WhatsApp (Lisa): +86 13611656360 | www.nickel-alloy.com

All Grades

Ni: NI200-N6 | Monel: 400-502, K-500, R-405 | Inconel: 600-740H, X-750, 725 | Incoloy: 800-27-7MO | Hastelloy: C-276-HYBRID-BC1, N | Super Austenitic: 904L-AL-6XN | Chromium-Rich: Alloy 33 | High-Strength Stainless: Nitronic 50/60, PH13-8Mo | Chlorination: Alloy 45 | Nimonic: 75-263 | Haynes: 25-HR-160 | RA: 330/333 | Precision: 1J22-4J45 | High-Strength: 18Ni250-AerMet100 | Heating: Cr20Ni80/60 | Specialty: Alloy 20-602CA

Product Forms: Bars(6-500mm) | Tubes(OD 6-610mm) | Plates(0.1-100mm) | Forgings | Welded Pipes | Fittings | Wire(0.05-10mm) | Strip(0.02-4.0mm)

SGS/BV/TUV. www.nickel-alloy.com