----- Original Message -----
From: dendriite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: MP35N
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ronn Blankenship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 12:56 AM
> Subject: Re: MP35N
>
>
> > At 12:25 AM 5/20/01 -0500, Dan wrote:
> > >Alloy.
> >
> > Oops. I nearly didn't scroll to the end. Thanks!
> >
> > Given the venue, though, don't you think you should have included the
> > hardness on the Brinnell scale? <g>
> >
> Even Rockwell hardness would be usefull. This alloy sounds like a
substitute
> for stainless steel in a corrosive enviroment. Is it classed as a
stainless?
No, it is not, it is not iron based. It is a substitute for stainless. It
is stronger and more ductile than stainless too. Hardness is not its best
feature, but it doesn't have to be.
Well, I looked some more and found at
http://rockgateco.com/products/MP35N.html
That the hardness of the best cold worked MP35N was 50 in Rockwell C
Dan
